From slighcl at wfu.edu Mon Jun 25 07:24:24 2007 From: slighcl at wfu.edu (slighcl) Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 10:24:24 -0400 Subject: [ilds] Durrell & Pater In-Reply-To: <16019134.1182732016625.JavaMail.root@elwamui-mouette.atl.sa.earthlink.net> References: <16019134.1182732016625.JavaMail.root@elwamui-mouette.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <467FD018.6080004@wfu.edu> On 6/24/2007 8:40 PM, Bruce Redwine wrote: >Charles, I have no idea if there is the kind of Durrell-Pater connection you're seeking. My first impulse is to say no. I hear no bells in the distance. But I still say, go after it and follow your instincts. I would like to hear what you come up with -- or don't. I'm sure you'll make it interesting. > Thanks, Bruce. Right now, knowing Durrell as well as I know Durrell, I am imagining that Durrell would have most likely absorbed any discernible Paterian influence in a secondary sort of way. That is, I am recalling what Durrell says about "the easy informal Roman silver-age style" in his "Talking Jolly Glibly" interview, collected by Earl Ingersoll. "It's a finished, delicate thing. It's like chamber music." In that moment, Durrell is talking specifically about Norman Douglas and about Lytton Strachey. But behind those names and the names of Max Beerbohm, E.M. Forster, and a few others, we would need to detect "Walter Pater," the prose stylist who taught a whole generation that their art should "aspire to the condition of music" and to whom almost every significant late Victorian and Edwardian "stylist" necessarily had to react, either by imitation or by rejection. The fact that Paterian style and Paterian "imaginary portraits" transfer sympathetically to the travel writing of the grand period also should be considered. So there it stands. No "first, leading hints," something that would make me say "yes, this must be pursued." Instead, as Richard reminded us, we do have the moment in Scobie's room when Darley notes Scobie' s Mona Lisa. I would note two aspects of Scobie's painting. First, in its cheap reproduction and in its various associations--for Scobie, it recalls his mother (!); for Darley, it recalls a praying-mantis--it sets a very ironic frame around Pater's La Gioconda. (We must grant that after 1873 Pater has ownership over, a kind of felt presence within any subsequent prose treatment of Lady Lisa. His description is simply inescapable for any alert stylist.) Second, I like Darley's follow-up: "It is as if his Mona Lisa were like no other; it is a deserter from Leonardo." Now there we do have something of the characteristically antinomian reading of the Renaissance as practiced by Pater. Pater had rewritten the Renaissance as an "outbreak" of secret tendencies and antinomian rebels. (Pater had any number of reasons for doing this in 1873, including his strong agon against Ruskin's reading of the Renaissance and his own homosexuality. I encourage anyone who enjoyed the secret plots of /The Da Vinci Code/ to read Pater's /The Renaissance/. It is all about being "in" on the Secrets.) Now Durrell has the signature work rebel against its creator, has the painting stage an outbreak against Leonardo and defect. But again she flees to Scobie and Scobie's little room! What will our little minds make of that? Charles -- ********************** Charles L. Sligh Department of English Wake Forest University slighcl at wfu.edu ********************** -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070625/61f1365d/attachment.html From bredwine1968 at earthlink.net Mon Jun 25 07:32:54 2007 From: bredwine1968 at earthlink.net (Bruce Redwine) Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 07:32:54 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [ilds] Martin Green on Durrell and great Message-ID: <2753223.1182781974290.JavaMail.root@elwamui-muscovy.atl.sa.earthlink.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070625/b2ef4dc1/attachment.html From richardpin at eircom.net Mon Jun 25 08:00:42 2007 From: richardpin at eircom.net (Richard Pine) Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 16:00:42 +0100 Subject: [ilds] Martin Green on Durrell and great References: <2753223.1182781974290.JavaMail.root@elwamui-muscovy.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <014501c7b739$9ccf03e0$854f1359@rpinelaptop> Much though I admired Green's 'Children of the Sun' when it appeared, I never could accept his chilly 'Minority Report' on the AQ - one tends to make choices when young (which is why so many of us fell for the AQ in adolesence) and I was so impressed with G Steiner's review at the same time (?) when he identified the AQ as a baroque novel - a term we have perhaps been unwisely ignoring in this reading of the novels. And I wonder whether Green's apparently natural affinity with the more gay (mad bad and dangerous to know) children of the sun made him, in his turn, preternaturally adverse to the sexuality in the AQ? RP ----- Original Message ----- From: Bruce Redwine To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca Sent: Monday, June 25, 2007 3:32 PM Subject: Re: [ilds] Martin Green on Durrell and great Bill, thanks for forwarding on to me Richard Pine's commentary, which I didn't get. Let me quote Martin Green in "A Minority Report" (The World of Lawrence Durrell, ed. Harry T. Moore, Carbondale, 1962, pp. 134-35), whose analysis, for me, still makes a point: "Complicatedness in place of complexity, violence in place of vigor, rhetoric in place of rendering the whole thing bears all the marks of a daydream about a Great Novel. As an examle of the writing: 'Riding beside her in the great car, someone beautiful, dark, and painted with great eyes like the prow of some Aegean ship, he had the sensation that his book was being passed rapidly underneath his life, as if under a sheet of paper containing the iron filings of temporary events, as a magnet is, in that commonplace experiment one does at school; and somehow setting up a copying magnetic field.' Here one should note the repetition of 'great,' with the even more significant apologetic 'commonplace'; which is carried on in 'passed rapidly underneath' and 'some Aegean ship'; this is the keynote of the Durrell experience, the insistent meaningless dramatization of everything -- theatricalization. And the two main images are so external, so premediated, so discontinuous with the situation they describe, that you feel the mortal chill of rhetoric itself. It is not Justine who looks like a Greek ship; it is the words about her, 'great painted eyes.' One does not have the sensation that the temporal events of one's life are iron filings, in a copying magnetic field; one sits down with a Poet's Handbook and thinks it up." Green's last comment about writing with a "Poet's Handbook" seems apt, since we've been discussing Durrell's use of other sources. Maybe Green observed something very early in Durrell's methodology. Now, I like this "mortal chill of rhetoric itself," which for me is a big part of the Durrellian experience, the deliberate dramatization, if not "theatricalization." But Green apparently sits on the other side of the aisle and judges the show from some realist's or minimalist's perspective. Nevertheless, he has a point. All good writers have their own style and manner, but they can overdo it. Hemingway overdoes it with "true," whose repetition tends to make his prose inauthentic, the opposite of what he craves. I'm wondering if "great" does the same to Durrell. Is "great" as Pine's "treasure-trove example of reinforcing the pre-eminence of the noun" also having the opposite effect? Namely, is "great" causing Pine's pirate's cave to turn into some Hollywood set for the very popular Pirates of the Caribbean? Bruce -----Original Message----- From: william godshalk Sent: Jun 24, 2007 8:11 PM To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca Subject: [ilds] Richard on Durrell and great Here's what Richard writes. The bold emphasis is mine. "But Durrell goes further in creating a double metaphor, the second part of which does not in fact depend on verbal connections: ?the great winepress of love?; the direct affiliation of sensual and sensitory images (?she pressed herself upon me like someone pressing on a bruise? - Quartet 44) creates his most effective and suggestive impressions. Even here, he adds a characteristic element which is littered almost carelessly throughout his work: the word ?great?. To give full emphasis to this strategy I should advert once more to Ricoeur?s point that in the correspondence of ideas with words, two classes of words must be distinguished, ?signs for ideas of objects and signs for ideas of relationship?. In the first are nouns, adjectives, participles, articles and pronouns; in the second, verbs, prepositions, adverbs and conjunctions.[1] Durrell?s constant use of the word ?great? ? ?the great car?, ?the great house?, ?the great bed?, ?the great head of his brother?, ?the great lighted heart? of the city (a Victorian technique borrowed, perhaps unconsciously, from Pater)[2] ? is a treasure-trove example of reinforcing the pre-eminence of the noun." Bill [1] Ricoeur, Rule of Metaphor, p. 49. [2] Cf. Pater, Marius vol. 1: ?the great college? (p. 6); ?the great portico? (p. 7); ?some great occasion? (p. 20); ?a great pestilence? (p. 31). At 10:51 PM 6/24/2007, you wrote: The figures seem within a band of comparability: nothing special about Durrell's use of 'great'. :Michael --- william godshalk wrote: --------------------------------- Bruce, Richard points out in his chapter on metaphor and simile that Durrelluses "great" more than one might expect. I simply did thenumbers. I suppose I should compare these numbers with those of otherBritish writers. Unfortunately the following numbers will not be toohelpful since I don't have the total number of words for any of thenovels. And many other issues of comparison might call for more uses of"great." Greene, Heart of the Matter, 39 times Norman Douglas, South Wind, 56 times Aldous Huxley in Island uses "great" 59 times. Waugh, Brideshead Revisited, 76 times Joyce Cary, The Horse's Mouth, 91 times. Robert Graves, I Claudius, 144 times Enough for now. Bill ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ ILDS mailing list ILDS at lists.uvic.ca https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070625/d78c1c97/attachment.html From slighcl at wfu.edu Mon Jun 25 08:39:05 2007 From: slighcl at wfu.edu (slighcl) Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 11:39:05 -0400 Subject: [ilds] Martin Green on Durrell and great In-Reply-To: <2753223.1182781974290.JavaMail.root@elwamui-muscovy.atl.sa.earthlink.net> References: <2753223.1182781974290.JavaMail.root@elwamui-muscovy.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <467FE199.1060608@wfu.edu> On 6/25/2007 10:32 AM, Bruce Redwine wrote: > > > Now, I like this "mortal chill of rhetoric itself," which for me is a > big part of the Durrellian experience, the deliberate dramatization, > if not "theatricalization." But Green apparently sits on the other > side of the aisle and judges the show from some realist's or > minimalist's perspective. Thank you for drawing us back to Green's "minority" opinion from the heady days of Durrell's arrival, Bruce. I agree with you: Green's critique brings into focus some key elements of Durrell's style. (I imagine Green would say that he "diagnoses" Durrell's "symptoms.") But then there you have it. Green clearly has an idea of what prose "should and should not be," a normative view of the Novel which is not keen to consider what readers actually encounter when they read Durrell's writing. What is that? What is the effect of this style on the reader? Certainly there is Durrell's fondness for all things "great." And sometimes that may be sloppy writing and distracting. (As a textual scholar, I note [from memory] that Durrell learned to catch himself in his excesses. Cf. the last few sentences of /Mountolive/--Narouz dead--in the Faber proofs versus the Faber 1st/1st. Durrell cut out the redundancy before the book was issued.) But what else can be happening with the trend toward inflation, exaggeration, and elaborate artificiality? I think that you have hinted at this crux, Bruce, when you observe that Green is writing from "some realist's or minimalist's perspective." I would counter Green's minority report--which can teach me something, I do not discount--and ask, "Why should our novels need to hold a focused, steady mirror up to "reality"? Why is artificiality so suspect? Must we readers and viewers always fidget with a guilty conscience, showing that we suspect and secretly indict ourselves for being complicit with art, which as Wilde taught us is ultimately artificial--never simply of "the real world"--always in some way "pretend" and "pretentious"? (Cf. certain moments in Plato and in the Taliban's elimination of the 'great' Buddhas of Bamyan for varied examples of this anxiety.) If we must justify ourselves, if we cannot jettison our tired old allegiances to mimesis, then we can salve our consciences by recalling Durrell's conceit in /Justine/, made clearer in /Balthazar/: we are reading "Justine," a manuscript prepared Darley, aka "Brother Ass." That gives a salve for those needing it: Darley is the self-indulgent one. Again, since my central focus now has become the work of Dante Gabriel Rossetti, Swinburne, Pater, &c., I discover that I worry much less about "artificiality." Having said that, I am noting here a certain similarity between past and present rejections of Pre-Raphaelite and Aesthetic Art (painting & prose) and the past & present objection to the writing of Lawrence Durrell. The key aspersions tend to be the same--artificial, solipsistic, "fleshly," "objectifying," "exoticizing." (Richard has just sent out an email invoking the word "baroque.") I no longer run from those terms, but reckon them up as points of imaginative strength and vision and strong style. It is never simple. One of Raymond Carver's favorite prose stylists was Lawrence Durrell. Upon that hook hangs much mystery. CLS Beware ! Beware ! His flashing eyes, his floating hair ! Weave a circle round him thrice, And close your eyes with holy dread, For he on honey-dew hath fed, And drunk the milk of Paradise. -- ********************** Charles L. Sligh Department of English Wake Forest University slighcl at wfu.edu ********************** -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070625/0a699d96/attachment.html From godshawl at email.uc.edu Mon Jun 25 09:37:09 2007 From: godshawl at email.uc.edu (william godshalk) Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 12:37:09 -0400 Subject: [ilds] Martin Green on Durrell and great In-Reply-To: <467FE199.1060608@wfu.edu> References: <2753223.1182781974290.JavaMail.root@elwamui-muscovy.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <467FE199.1060608@wfu.edu> Message-ID: <20070625163704.KSFN9981.gx5.fuse.net@bill-hdl5a49h32.email.uc.edu> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070625/a5734870/attachment.html From bredwine1968 at earthlink.net Mon Jun 25 10:39:26 2007 From: bredwine1968 at earthlink.net (Bruce Redwine) Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 10:39:26 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [ilds] Martin Green on Durrell and great Message-ID: <4317148.1182793166884.JavaMail.root@elwamui-muscovy.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Thanks, Bill and Charles, for restoring my faith and coming to my aid during moments of doubt. In the end, I think one must accept Green's criticism as just, but then shrug one's shoulders and say, so what? As you both point out, it comes down to how you see art functioning and then rejecting attempts to establish prescriptive standards. Charles's example of Raymond Carver is a good one, a great one, a mysterious one indeed, and says a lot about how artist work and see themselves. Great artists don't force such standards on themselves. Look at the Milton of Paradise Lost and the one of Samson Agonistes -- opposite styles. Look at the Joyce of Dubliners and the one of Finnegans Wake -- also opposites. Those two during their lifetimes traveled in opposite stylistic directions. Now take Cormac McCarthy, who mixes his styles indiscriminately. In his novels you can read Hemingwayesque prose followed by Melvillean, all within a few pages. And all working, in my view. Coleridge, however, after he drank his "milk of paradise," stopped writing poetry. So too much is never a good thing. Which comes back to Durrell and his problems with the bottle. Bruce -----Original Message----- >From: slighcl >Sent: Jun 25, 2007 8:39 AM >To: Bruce Redwine , ilds at lists.uvic.ca >Subject: Re: [ilds] Martin Green on Durrell and great > >On 6/25/2007 10:32 AM, Bruce Redwine wrote: > >> >> >> Now, I like this "mortal chill of rhetoric itself," which for me is a >> big part of the Durrellian experience, the deliberate dramatization, >> if not "theatricalization." But Green apparently sits on the other >> side of the aisle and judges the show from some realist's or >> minimalist's perspective. > >Thank you for drawing us back to Green's "minority" opinion from the >heady days of Durrell's arrival, Bruce. I agree with you: Green's >critique brings into focus some key elements of Durrell's style. (I >imagine Green would say that he "diagnoses" Durrell's "symptoms.") But >then there you have it. Green clearly has an idea of what prose "should >and should not be," a normative view of the Novel which is not keen to >consider what readers actually encounter when they read Durrell's >writing. What is that? What is the effect of this style on the >reader? Certainly there is Durrell's fondness for all things "great." >And sometimes that may be sloppy writing and distracting. (As a textual >scholar, I note [from memory] that Durrell learned to catch himself in >his excesses. Cf. the last few sentences of /Mountolive/--Narouz >dead--in the Faber proofs versus the Faber 1st/1st. Durrell cut out the >redundancy before the book was issued.) But what else can be happening >with the trend toward inflation, exaggeration, and elaborate >artificiality? > >I think that you have hinted at this crux, Bruce, when you observe that >Green is writing from "some realist's or minimalist's perspective." I >would counter Green's minority report--which can teach me something, I >do not discount--and ask, "Why should our novels need to hold a focused, >steady mirror up to "reality"? Why is artificiality so suspect? Must >we readers and viewers always fidget with a guilty conscience, showing >that we suspect and secretly indict ourselves for being complicit with >art, which as Wilde taught us is ultimately artificial--never simply of >"the real world"--always in some way "pretend" and "pretentious"? (Cf. >certain moments in Plato and in the Taliban's elimination of the 'great' >Buddhas of Bamyan for varied examples of this anxiety.) If we must >justify ourselves, if we cannot jettison our tired old allegiances to >mimesis, then we can salve our consciences by recalling Durrell's >conceit in /Justine/, made clearer in /Balthazar/: we are reading >"Justine," a manuscript prepared Darley, aka "Brother Ass." That gives >a salve for those needing it: Darley is the self-indulgent one. > >Again, since my central focus now has become the work of Dante Gabriel >Rossetti, Swinburne, Pater, &c., I discover that I worry much less about >"artificiality." Having said that, I am noting here a certain >similarity between past and present rejections of Pre-Raphaelite and >Aesthetic Art (painting & prose) and the past & present objection to the >writing of Lawrence Durrell. The key aspersions tend to be the >same--artificial, solipsistic, "fleshly," "objectifying," >"exoticizing." (Richard has just sent out an email invoking the word >"baroque.") I no longer run from those terms, but reckon them up as >points of imaginative strength and vision and strong style. > >It is never simple. One of Raymond Carver's favorite prose stylists was >Lawrence Durrell. Upon that hook hangs much mystery. > >CLS > > Beware ! Beware ! > His flashing eyes, his floating hair ! > Weave a circle round him thrice, > And close your eyes with holy dread, > For he on honey-dew hath fed, > And drunk the milk of Paradise. > From gifford at uvic.ca Mon Jun 25 11:28:47 2007 From: gifford at uvic.ca (James Gifford) Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 12:28:47 -0600 Subject: [ilds] Fwd: Lawrence Durrell In-Reply-To: <513438.55542.qm@web86301.mail.ird.yahoo.com> References: <513438.55542.qm@web86301.mail.ird.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <2bfc74100706251128y2b9933ecrbac6d4b76fea2896@mail.gmail.com> Can anyone lend Walford Davies a hand with this? I don't recall this off the top of my head, but perhaps collectively we can give a response -- please email him back directly (w1d at btopenworld.com) unless there's something of benefit to the list as well. Cheers, James ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Walford Davies Date: 25-Jun-2007 09:22 Subject: Lawrence Durrell To: gifford at uvic.ca Dear James Gifford Do forgive me for writing to you out of the blue like this. I'd be interested in finding out in what work Lawrence Durrell used the phrase "the writer's middle years", as a description - if I recall correctly - of a writer's loss of literary power. I'm sure I remember the phrase from somewhere in his writing, and would like to get it in full context, but don't seem able to track it down. Please don't put yourself out unduly ? but if the answer comes fairly easily to hand, I'd be most grateful for the source. Best wishes in your work. Sincerely Walford Davies From godshawl at email.uc.edu Mon Jun 25 11:34:43 2007 From: godshawl at email.uc.edu (william godshalk) Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 14:34:43 -0400 Subject: [ilds] too much is just enough In-Reply-To: <4317148.1182793166884.JavaMail.root@elwamui-muscovy.atl.sa .earthlink.net> References: <4317148.1182793166884.JavaMail.root@elwamui-muscovy.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <20070625183448.LSFO9981.gx5.fuse.net@bill-hdl5a49h32.email.uc.edu> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070625/9cb750a1/attachment.html From bredwine1968 at earthlink.net Mon Jun 25 11:38:47 2007 From: bredwine1968 at earthlink.net (Bruce Redwine) Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 11:38:47 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [ilds] Martin Green on Durrell and great Message-ID: <24360235.1182796728105.JavaMail.root@elwamui-lapwing.atl.sa.earthlink.net> RP, interesting comment about Martin Green's Children of the Sun, which I haven't read. But on the face of it, given the subject matter of the decadent twenties and thirties in the UK, I would have thought the opposite, that Green would have been "preternaturally" receptive, not "adverse," to the sexuality of the Quartet. I go along with George Steiner's use of "baroque" novel to describe the Quartet but would place the novels alongside or above Wuthering Heights, certainly not below it. Bruce -----Original Message----- >From: Richard Pine >Sent: Jun 25, 2007 8:00 AM >To: Bruce Redwine , ilds at lists.uvic.ca >Subject: Re: [ilds] Martin Green on Durrell and great > >Much though I admired Green's 'Children of the Sun' when it appeared, I never could accept his chilly 'Minority Report' on the AQ - one tends to make choices when young (which is why so many of us fell for the AQ in adolesence) and I was so impressed with G Steiner's review at the same time (?) when he identified the AQ as a baroque novel - a term we have perhaps been unwisely ignoring in this reading of the novels. And I wonder whether Green's apparently natural affinity with the more gay (mad bad and dangerous to know) children of the sun made him, in his turn, preternaturally adverse to the sexuality in the AQ? >RP > From slighcl at wfu.edu Mon Jun 25 11:49:52 2007 From: slighcl at wfu.edu (slighcl) Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 14:49:52 -0400 Subject: [ilds] Fwd: Lawrence Durrell In-Reply-To: <2bfc74100706251128y2b9933ecrbac6d4b76fea2896@mail.gmail.com> References: <513438.55542.qm@web86301.mail.ird.yahoo.com> <2bfc74100706251128y2b9933ecrbac6d4b76fea2896@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <46800E50.1000203@wfu.edu> On 6/25/2007 2:28 PM, James Gifford wrote: >Can anyone lend Walford Davies a hand with this? >I'd be interested in finding out in what work Lawrence Durrell used >the phrase "the writer's middle years", as a description - if I recall >correctly - of a writer's loss of literary power. > >I'm sure I remember the phrase from somewhere in his writing, and >would like to get it in full context, but don't seem able to track it >down. > Dear Jamie: Please refer Walford. Davies to the poetry-- Durrell, Lawrence: [from Collected Poems: 1931-1974 (1985)], Faber and Faber LETTERS IN DARKNESS 12 January 1953 So at last we come to the writer's Middle years, the hardest yet to bear, All will agree: for it is now He condenses, prunes and tries to order The experiences which gorged upon his youth. I quoted the poem as an epigraph to my little edition of Durrell's unpublished essay, "The Minor Mythologies" (/Deus Loci/ NS7 1999-2000). This bit about "these ripe and terrible / Years of the /agon/" perhaps should be hung up as a title over some of our recent conversations about Durrell. Recall always: although the work had gestated long before coming to term, Durrell was 45 years old when /Justine /appeared in print. Charles -- ********************** Charles L. Sligh Department of English Wake Forest University slighcl at wfu.edu ********************** -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070625/85df713a/attachment.html From odos.fanourios at gmail.com Mon Jun 25 18:07:57 2007 From: odos.fanourios at gmail.com (James Gifford) Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 19:07:57 -0600 Subject: [ilds] Richard on Durrell and great In-Reply-To: <20070625031106.UBNU7351.gx4.fuse.net@bill-hdl5a49h32.email.uc.edu> Message-ID: A concordance versus a collocation may help here ? does "great" occur frequently in only a few instances, which would increase it?s prominence? Also, are there any particular words with which it is more frequently associated than would be the norm? Hmmm... I'm afraid I can't answer either of those questions. Cheers, James From godshawl at email.uc.edu Mon Jun 25 18:59:39 2007 From: godshawl at email.uc.edu (william godshalk) Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 21:59:39 -0400 Subject: [ilds] Richard on Durrell and great In-Reply-To: References: <20070625031106.UBNU7351.gx4.fuse.net@bill-hdl5a49h32.email.uc.edu> Message-ID: <20070626015933.XUHH23820.gx6.fuse.net@bill-hdl5a49h32.email.uc.edu> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070625/9deb08d4/attachment.html From slighcl at wfu.edu Mon Jun 25 19:46:20 2007 From: slighcl at wfu.edu (slighcl) Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 22:46:20 -0400 Subject: [ilds] Durrell suggests a "collage" In-Reply-To: <20070626015933.XUHH23820.gx6.fuse.net@bill-hdl5a49h32.email.uc.edu> References: <20070625031106.UBNU7351.gx4.fuse.net@bill-hdl5a49h32.email.uc.edu> <20070626015933.XUHH23820.gx6.fuse.net@bill-hdl5a49h32.email.uc.edu> Message-ID: <46807DFC.5030809@wfu.edu> > The original title for this book when first Aldo described it > to me > had a certain comforting insolence; but of course when I came to > examine the historical data which was available I realised > that to do > anything with pretensions to completeness would require a dozen > volumes. I suggested something of more modest dimensions, but > which > nevertheless could try to capture by *a technique of > /collage/*/ /the poetic > quiddity of this extraordinary land. Provence! What was it > exactly? -- "Provence Entire? Chapter One," /Twentieth Century Literature/, Vol. 33, No. 3, Lawrence Durrell Issue, Part I. (Autumn, 1987), 416. I paused when I read Durrell's modest proposal for the "collage" book that would become /Caesar's Vast Ghost/--or is this a modest admission of a debt owed to Michael et. al.? CLS -- ********************** Charles L. Sligh Department of English Wake Forest University slighcl at wfu.edu ********************** -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070625/1e0d623f/attachment.html From slighcl at wfu.edu Mon Jun 25 20:02:34 2007 From: slighcl at wfu.edu (slighcl) Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 23:02:34 -0400 Subject: [ilds] Portrait d'une librairie en vieil homme In-Reply-To: <46807DFC.5030809@wfu.edu> References: <20070625031106.UBNU7351.gx4.fuse.net@bill-hdl5a49h32.email.uc.edu> <20070626015933.XUHH23820.gx6.fuse.net@bill-hdl5a49h32.email.uc.edu> <46807DFC.5030809@wfu.edu> Message-ID: <468081CA.8010308@wfu.edu> http://zoofilm.canalblog.com/images/gw_durrell_590x618.jpg http://zoofilm.canalblog.com/archives/2005/10/14/892826.html version fran?aise George and Co Portrait d'une librairie en vieil homme -- ********************** Charles L. Sligh Department of English Wake Forest University slighcl at wfu.edu ********************** -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070625/34f73cfc/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: gw_durrell_590x618.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 66209 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070625/34f73cfc/attachment.jpg From godshawl at email.uc.edu Mon Jun 25 20:48:29 2007 From: godshawl at email.uc.edu (william godshalk) Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 23:48:29 -0400 Subject: [ilds] Durrell suggests a "collage" In-Reply-To: <46807DFC.5030809@wfu.edu> References: <20070625031106.UBNU7351.gx4.fuse.net@bill-hdl5a49h32.email.uc.edu> <20070626015933.XUHH23820.gx6.fuse.net@bill-hdl5a49h32.email.uc.edu> <46807DFC.5030809@wfu.edu> Message-ID: <20070626034824.BBIZ7351.gx4.fuse.net@bill-hdl5a49h32.email.uc.edu> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070625/8f91c0f7/attachment.html From vcel at ix.netcom.com Mon Jun 25 21:36:02 2007 From: vcel at ix.netcom.com (Vittorio Celentano) Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 00:36:02 -0400 Subject: [ilds] Portrait d'une librairie en vieil homme References: <20070625031106.UBNU7351.gx4.fuse.net@bill-hdl5a49h32.email.uc.edu> <20070626015933.XUHH23820.gx6.fuse.net@bill-hdl5a49h32.email.uc.edu><46807DFC.5030809@wfu.edu> <468081CA.8010308@wfu.edu> Message-ID: <001501c7b7ab$81b630c0$ed525645@vittoriohx7smy> Vittorio Celentano ----- Original Message ----- From: slighcl To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca Sent: Monday, June 25, 2007 11:02 PM Subject: [ilds] Portrait d'une librairie en vieil homme http://zoofilm.canalblog.com/archives/2005/10/14/892826.html version fran?aise George and Co Portrait d'une librairie en vieil homme -- ********************** Charles L. Sligh Department of English Wake Forest University slighcl at wfu.edu ********************** ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ ILDS mailing list ILDS at lists.uvic.ca https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070626/4fb755c2/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/octet-stream Size: 45365 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070626/4fb755c2/attachment.obj -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 66209 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070626/4fb755c2/attachment.jpe From marcpiel at interdesign.fr Tue Jun 26 01:47:51 2007 From: marcpiel at interdesign.fr (Marc Piel) Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 10:47:51 +0200 Subject: [ilds] Portrait d'une librairie en vieil homme In-Reply-To: <468081CA.8010308@wfu.edu> References: <20070625031106.UBNU7351.gx4.fuse.net@bill-hdl5a49h32.email.uc.edu> <20070626015933.XUHH23820.gx6.fuse.net@bill-hdl5a49h32.email.uc.edu> <46807DFC.5030809@wfu.edu> <468081CA.8010308@wfu.edu> Message-ID: <4680D2B7.4010009@interdesign.fr> I took a visiting friend there last week. Was very disappointed; could not find anything, but masses of modern hit parade american novels. They have the shop next door now and anything interesting is there at extremely high prices. You certainly make any discoveries at Shakespeare & Co. any more! Not one Durrell in the poetry section! Marc Piel, Paris, France. slighcl wrote: > http://zoofilm.canalblog.com/images/gw_durrell_590x618.jpg > > > http://zoofilm.canalblog.com/archives/2005/10/14/892826.html > version fran?aise > George and Co > Portrait d'une librairie en vieil homme > > -- > ********************** > Charles L. Sligh > Department of English > Wake Forest University > slighcl at wfu.edu > ********************** > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds From michaelhaag at btinternet.com Tue Jun 26 08:41:43 2007 From: michaelhaag at btinternet.com (MICHAEL HAAG) Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 16:41:43 +0100 (BST) Subject: [ilds] Durrell suggests a "collage" In-Reply-To: <20070626034824.BBIZ7351.gx4.fuse.net@bill-hdl5a49h32.email.uc.edu> Message-ID: <433345.73362.qm@web86613.mail.ird.yahoo.com> I presume 'rob' is intentional. :Michael --- william godshalk wrote: --------------------------------- Okay, we have another suggestion "collage" to add to the list:pastiche, palimpsest, cento, "found." But it might be best to create our own name for the way Durrell doesit. To sleep, to sleep perchance to dream. Aye there's the rob. Think thatyou've but slumbered here. We are such things as dreams are made on. WW At 10:46 PM 6/25/2007, you wrote: The original title for this book when first Aldo described it tome had a certain comforting insolence; but of course when I came to examine the historical data which was available I realised that todo anything with pretensions to completeness would require a dozen volumes. I suggested something of more modest dimensions, butwhich nevertheless could try to capture by a technique of collagethe poetic quiddity of this extraordinary land. Provence! What was itexactly? -- "Provence Entire? Chapter One," Twentieth CenturyLiterature, Vol. 33, No. 3, Lawrence Durrell Issue, Part I. (Autumn,1987), 416. I paused when I read Durrell's modest proposal for the"collage" book that would become Caesar's Vast Ghost--or isthis a modest admission of a debt owed to Michael et. al.? CLS -- **********************Charles L. SlighDepartment of EnglishWake Forest Universityslighcl at wfu.edu********************** _______________________________________________ ILDS mailing list ILDS at lists.uvic.ca https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds *************************************** W. L.Godshalk * Department ofEnglish * University ofCincinnati Stellar disorder * Cincinnati OH 45221-0069 * 513-281-5927 ***************************************> _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > From michaelhaag at btinternet.com Tue Jun 26 08:42:43 2007 From: michaelhaag at btinternet.com (MICHAEL HAAG) Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 16:42:43 +0100 (BST) Subject: [ilds] Durrell suggests a "collage" In-Reply-To: <20070626034824.BBIZ7351.gx4.fuse.net@bill-hdl5a49h32.email.uc.edu> Message-ID: <518296.14747.qm@web86604.mail.ird.yahoo.com> I presume 'rob' is intentional. :Michael --- william godshalk wrote: --------------------------------- Okay, we have another suggestion "collage" to add to the list:pastiche, palimpsest, cento, "found." But it might be best to create our own name for the way Durrell doesit. To sleep, to sleep perchance to dream. Aye there's the rob. Think thatyou've but slumbered here. We are such things as dreams are made on. WW At 10:46 PM 6/25/2007, you wrote: The original title for this book when first Aldo described it tome had a certain comforting insolence; but of course when I came to examine the historical data which was available I realised that todo anything with pretensions to completeness would require a dozen volumes. I suggested something of more modest dimensions, butwhich nevertheless could try to capture by a technique of collagethe poetic quiddity of this extraordinary land. Provence! What was itexactly? -- "Provence Entire? Chapter One," Twentieth CenturyLiterature, Vol. 33, No. 3, Lawrence Durrell Issue, Part I. (Autumn,1987), 416. I paused when I read Durrell's modest proposal for the"collage" book that would become Caesar's Vast Ghost--or isthis a modest admission of a debt owed to Michael et. al.? CLS -- **********************Charles L. SlighDepartment of EnglishWake Forest Universityslighcl at wfu.edu********************** _______________________________________________ ILDS mailing list ILDS at lists.uvic.ca https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds *************************************** W. L.Godshalk * Department ofEnglish * University ofCincinnati Stellar disorder * Cincinnati OH 45221-0069 * 513-281-5927 ***************************************> _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > From michaelhaag at btinternet.com Tue Jun 26 08:43:40 2007 From: michaelhaag at btinternet.com (MICHAEL HAAG) Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 16:43:40 +0100 (BST) Subject: [ilds] Durrell suggests a "collage" In-Reply-To: <20070626034824.BBIZ7351.gx4.fuse.net@bill-hdl5a49h32.email.uc.edu> Message-ID: <956202.58240.qm@web86614.mail.ird.yahoo.com> I presume 'rob' is intentional. :Michael --- william godshalk wrote: --------------------------------- Okay, we have another suggestion "collage" to add to the list:pastiche, palimpsest, cento, "found." But it might be best to create our own name for the way Durrell doesit. To sleep, to sleep perchance to dream. Aye there's the rob. Think thatyou've but slumbered here. We are such things as dreams are made on. WW At 10:46 PM 6/25/2007, you wrote: The original title for this book when first Aldo described it tome had a certain comforting insolence; but of course when I came to examine the historical data which was available I realised that todo anything with pretensions to completeness would require a dozen volumes. I suggested something of more modest dimensions, butwhich nevertheless could try to capture by a technique of collagethe poetic quiddity of this extraordinary land. Provence! What was itexactly? -- "Provence Entire? Chapter One," Twentieth CenturyLiterature, Vol. 33, No. 3, Lawrence Durrell Issue, Part I. (Autumn,1987), 416. I paused when I read Durrell's modest proposal for the"collage" book that would become Caesar's Vast Ghost--or isthis a modest admission of a debt owed to Michael et. al.? CLS -- **********************Charles L. SlighDepartment of EnglishWake Forest Universityslighcl at wfu.edu********************** _______________________________________________ ILDS mailing list ILDS at lists.uvic.ca https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds *************************************** W. L.Godshalk * Department ofEnglish * University ofCincinnati Stellar disorder * Cincinnati OH 45221-0069 * 513-281-5927 ***************************************> _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > From michaelhaag at btinternet.com Tue Jun 26 08:43:44 2007 From: michaelhaag at btinternet.com (MICHAEL HAAG) Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 16:43:44 +0100 (BST) Subject: [ilds] Durrell suggests a "collage" In-Reply-To: <20070626034824.BBIZ7351.gx4.fuse.net@bill-hdl5a49h32.email.uc.edu> Message-ID: <521001.76701.qm@web86608.mail.ird.yahoo.com> I presume 'rob' is intentional. :Michael --- william godshalk wrote: --------------------------------- Okay, we have another suggestion "collage" to add to the list:pastiche, palimpsest, cento, "found." But it might be best to create our own name for the way Durrell doesit. To sleep, to sleep perchance to dream. Aye there's the rob. Think thatyou've but slumbered here. We are such things as dreams are made on. WW At 10:46 PM 6/25/2007, you wrote: The original title for this book when first Aldo described it tome had a certain comforting insolence; but of course when I came to examine the historical data which was available I realised that todo anything with pretensions to completeness would require a dozen volumes. I suggested something of more modest dimensions, butwhich nevertheless could try to capture by a technique of collagethe poetic quiddity of this extraordinary land. Provence! What was itexactly? -- "Provence Entire? Chapter One," Twentieth CenturyLiterature, Vol. 33, No. 3, Lawrence Durrell Issue, Part I. (Autumn,1987), 416. I paused when I read Durrell's modest proposal for the"collage" book that would become Caesar's Vast Ghost--or isthis a modest admission of a debt owed to Michael et. al.? CLS -- **********************Charles L. SlighDepartment of EnglishWake Forest Universityslighcl at wfu.edu********************** _______________________________________________ ILDS mailing list ILDS at lists.uvic.ca https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds *************************************** W. L.Godshalk * Department ofEnglish * University ofCincinnati Stellar disorder * Cincinnati OH 45221-0069 * 513-281-5927 ***************************************> _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > From michaelhaag at btinternet.com Tue Jun 26 08:45:22 2007 From: michaelhaag at btinternet.com (MICHAEL HAAG) Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 16:45:22 +0100 (BST) Subject: [ilds] Durrell suggests a "collage" In-Reply-To: <20070626034824.BBIZ7351.gx4.fuse.net@bill-hdl5a49h32.email.uc.edu> Message-ID: <969368.73406.qm@web86608.mail.ird.yahoo.com> I presume 'rob' is intentional. :Michael --- william godshalk wrote: --------------------------------- Okay, we have another suggestion "collage" to add to the list:pastiche, palimpsest, cento, "found." But it might be best to create our own name for the way Durrell doesit. To sleep, to sleep perchance to dream. Aye there's the rob. Think thatyou've but slumbered here. We are such things as dreams are made on. WW At 10:46 PM 6/25/2007, you wrote: The original title for this book when first Aldo described it tome had a certain comforting insolence; but of course when I came to examine the historical data which was available I realised that todo anything with pretensions to completeness would require a dozen volumes. I suggested something of more modest dimensions, butwhich nevertheless could try to capture by a technique of collagethe poetic quiddity of this extraordinary land. Provence! What was itexactly? -- "Provence Entire? Chapter One," Twentieth CenturyLiterature, Vol. 33, No. 3, Lawrence Durrell Issue, Part I. (Autumn,1987), 416. I paused when I read Durrell's modest proposal for the"collage" book that would become Caesar's Vast Ghost--or isthis a modest admission of a debt owed to Michael et. al.? CLS -- **********************Charles L. SlighDepartment of EnglishWake Forest Universityslighcl at wfu.edu********************** _______________________________________________ ILDS mailing list ILDS at lists.uvic.ca https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds *************************************** W. L.Godshalk * Department ofEnglish * University ofCincinnati Stellar disorder * Cincinnati OH 45221-0069 * 513-281-5927 ***************************************> _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > From godshawl at email.uc.edu Tue Jun 26 09:52:49 2007 From: godshawl at email.uc.edu (william godshalk) Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 12:52:49 -0400 Subject: [ilds] Freud suggests In-Reply-To: <521001.76701.qm@web86608.mail.ird.yahoo.com> References: <20070626034824.BBIZ7351.gx4.fuse.net@bill-hdl5a49h32.email.uc.edu> <521001.76701.qm@web86608.mail.ird.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20070626165243.EBSB7351.gx4.fuse.net@bill-hdl5a49h32.email.uc.edu> I wrote: "Aye there's the rob." Michael answered: "I presume 'rob' is intentional." >And some people think Doctor Joy was wrong. But I got the message four times. Return, return, return? Bill *************************************** W. L. Godshalk * Department of English * University of Cincinnati Stellar disorder * Cincinnati OH 45221-0069 * 513-281-5927 *************************************** From bredwine1968 at earthlink.net Tue Jun 26 10:08:45 2007 From: bredwine1968 at earthlink.net (Bruce Redwine) Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 10:08:45 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [ilds] Freud suggests Message-ID: <19999090.1182877726043.JavaMail.root@elwamui-little.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Freud wasn't always wrong. He was just mainly a fraud. Bruce -----Original Message----- >From: william godshalk >Sent: Jun 26, 2007 9:52 AM >To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca >Subject: [ilds] Freud suggests > >I wrote: "Aye there's the rob." > >Michael answered: "I presume 'rob' is intentional." > >>And some people think Doctor Joy was wrong. > >But I got the message four times. Return, return, return? > > >Bill > > > >*************************************** >W. L. Godshalk * >Department of English * >University of Cincinnati Stellar disorder * >Cincinnati OH 45221-0069 * >513-281-5927 >*************************************** > > >_______________________________________________ >ILDS mailing list >ILDS at lists.uvic.ca >https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds From richardpin at eircom.net Tue Jun 26 10:17:26 2007 From: richardpin at eircom.net (Richard Pine) Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 18:17:26 +0100 Subject: [ilds] Freud suggests References: <19999090.1182877726043.JavaMail.root@elwamui-little.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <018201c7b815$e3365040$584e1359@rpinelaptop> As one very eminent psychiatrist said to me recently, 'A psychiatrist's room is papered wall-to-wall with charlatinism'. RP ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce Redwine" To: Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2007 6:08 PM Subject: Re: [ilds] Freud suggests > Freud wasn't always wrong. He was just mainly a fraud. > > Bruce > > -----Original Message----- >>From: william godshalk >>Sent: Jun 26, 2007 9:52 AM >>To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca >>Subject: [ilds] Freud suggests >> >>I wrote: "Aye there's the rob." >> >>Michael answered: "I presume 'rob' is intentional." >> >>>And some people think Doctor Joy was wrong. >> >>But I got the message four times. Return, return, return? >> >> >>Bill >> >> >> >>*************************************** >>W. L. Godshalk * >>Department of English * >>University of Cincinnati Stellar disorder * >>Cincinnati OH 45221-0069 * >>513-281-5927 >>*************************************** >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>ILDS mailing list >>ILDS at lists.uvic.ca >>https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > From godshawl at email.uc.edu Tue Jun 26 10:31:35 2007 From: godshawl at email.uc.edu (william godshalk) Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 13:31:35 -0400 Subject: [ilds] Freud suggests In-Reply-To: <018201c7b815$e3365040$584e1359@rpinelaptop> References: <19999090.1182877726043.JavaMail.root@elwamui-little.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <018201c7b815$e3365040$584e1359@rpinelaptop> Message-ID: <20070626173128.BETT15819.gx6.fuse.net@bill-hdl5a49h32.email.uc.edu> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070626/7a237c91/attachment.html From odos.fanourios at gmail.com Tue Jun 26 11:16:37 2007 From: odos.fanourios at gmail.com (James Gifford) Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 12:16:37 -0600 Subject: [ilds] Durrell suggests a "collage" In-Reply-To: <46807DFC.5030809@wfu.edu> Message-ID: Charles, You pose a troubling question, but one that might be ripe for some serious discussion -- I'll put aside any sense of outcomes and simple fiddle with this idea... > I paused when I read Durrell's modest proposal > for the "collage" book that would become Caesar's > Vast Ghost--or is this a modest admission of a > debt owed to Michael et. al.? If Durrell prefaces his thoughts on _Caesar's Vast Ghost_ with a tip of the hat to collage, this comes with a context, though as Michael has pointed out, this also has problems. Without seeming like I want to leap to the defence of an author for the work I like the least and am most suspicious of, I think the evidence could be laid out for some pondering: Pro-Collage: 1) he's saying this one year after Kathy Acker lifted short passages of the Quartet to add to her novel _Don Quixote_. This is a technique she had been recognizably using since the very early 1980s through a publisher Durrell knew: Grove Press. 2) he's doing so a full three decades after Burroughs' _Naked Lunch_, and just shy of three decades after he would have first encountered Burroughs in Edinburgh at the International Writers Conference. Cortazar also used the cut-up technique in _Hopscotch_. Let's also not forget that Burroughs and Durrell shared a publisher: The Olympia Press, which republished _The Black Book_ and derives from the Obelisk Press. 3) collage would not be a terrible surprising development from Durrell's notebook methods, which are already anticipating the cut-up method Burroughs took to his own writings and 'plagiarised' sources. Then again, we don't want to seem like we're dismissing the kind of things that have happened with Kaavya Viswanathan... The other possibilities seem to be: Anti-Collage: 1) there is clearly a case of allusion and pastiche in the Quartet and earlier works, much as we've already outlined. This might not count in _Pied Piper of Lovers_, but the preponderance of the fiction seems to very openly adopt and integrate various texts that happen to be floating about Durrell's studio or that fall into his notebooks (letters, other notebooks, choice turns of phrase, aphorisms, etc...). This may simply be set aside as "not collage" but an allusive method not very different from T.S. Eliot's, and that's not such a bad heritage to claim (and revise...). 2) outright lifting of at least one passage in Caesar's Vast Ghost (and I would like to repeat, I have doubts about how much Durrell actually cobbled together the fragments in his notebooks for that last book), and very likely more. As Michael points out, this is taken text not an 'inspiration.' 3) interweaving excerpts is not the same as cut-up or collage, which more often involves changes at the sentence level. Durrell is working with a larger chunk (or chunks) in _Caesar's Vast Ghost_ (if he was actually doing it himself) and retains the original syntactic structure. At any rate, those are my preliminary thoughts, which Charles' email prompts. I will freely admit that I have doubts about Durrell's full involvement in the assembling of _Caesar's Vast Ghost_ (though it does contain some lovely passages) and it's not a book I would go to in order to discuss Durrell's techniques in the main body of this fiction and poetry. Biographically, I think the suicide of Sappho marks a breaking point in his career -- I'm fascinated by what was going on in those late notebooks from Monsieur through to Quinx and a little beyond, but in his last few years I think there was little of Durrell left. Nonetheless, I think this debate is one of importance -- my hunch is that both 'sides' are right here. _Caesar's Vast Ghost_ is very problematic. *And* the spliced in variations on phrases or images (largely from historical works) seems to have been very much a part of his working technique and mode of production through notebooks. I'm not sure if the two things are entire separate, but the later fascinates me while the former troubles me. As I've said before, the late works (alter works?) move ever-closer to being notebooks, so I would expect them to contain unrevised or barely revised snippets from things he found intriguing and put into his notebooks. For anyone who has ever kept a commonplace book, that should be familiar -- revising those fragments into a narrative intrigues me, and I became very, very intrigued when I first read Durrell and slowly noticed the fragments reverting back to their fragmentary state, as if suggesting the imposition of order was false. _Monsieur_ constructs order from notebooks (several orders, actually), but it shows us this is false. Bruce (the character) says this explicitly. _Quinx_ takes us back to the original disorder and leaves us there, and most readers dislike that. I just happen to like it very much. But still, I remain unsatisfied with this explanation. I think there's much more to be said. So, in a classic modernist sense, how would a T.S. Eliot view Durrell's borrowings in the main body of his works, and how would we perform a close reading of the passage Charles cites: > I realised that to do anything with pretensions > to completeness would require a dozen volumes. I > suggested something of more modest dimensions, > but which nevertheless could try to capture by a > technique of collage the poetic quiddity of this > extraordinary land. My first anchors in a close reading would be "technique," "collage," "pretensions to completeness," and "quiddity." I don't think that invoking the technique of collage should be taken lightly, and I would suspect (without reference) that this is removed from the final version -- Durrell has a nasty habit of saying what he's up to in the first draft, publishing that somewhere, then cutting it out when the final work goes to press. I've noticed that more than once. If it's in the final version, I might be persuaded to read this as meaning he will juxtapose a wide array of scenes in Provence without a pretension to ordering them or creating an author-imposed unity -- if it's not in the final version, then I'm be willing to bet he meant collage in a very technical way with regard to the writing. Even at that, I think I vacillate between the two potential readings here. But, from my "anchor" words, I would think that somehow a technique of collage contradicts the pretentiousness of thinking something could be complete -- that's akin to a discussion of the death of the author, and in his late notebooks, Durrell is actively mentioning Roland Barthes, who is often seen as closely tied to the postmodern techniques used by Burroughs and Acker, whom I've mentioned above. Somehow, giving up on completeness (an illusion perhaps created when the pure expostulations captured in a notebooks are stitched together into an order) is related to collage, literary technique, and that very Durrellian word "quiddity," which I have not seen adequately defined. Should this surprise us after _Quinx_? Is the Quintet simply a better version of this notion, executed before the full messiness of Durrell last years? Or, in other words, is _Caesar's Vast Ghost_ a failed attempt to drive the technique of the Quintet further? I suspect both answers are right here, and one of Durrell's late notebooks makes me think this very strongly -- had he continued in another path he was pursuing, it might be made a terribly exciting conclusion to this technique, but alas, the wrong book got finished... So, how would a Kathy Acker fan read _Caesar's Vast Ghost_? Perhaps more significantly (for me at least), how would that same reader read _Quinx_? Best, James From slighcl at wfu.edu Tue Jun 26 12:08:37 2007 From: slighcl at wfu.edu (slighcl) Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 15:08:37 -0400 Subject: [ilds] Durrell suggests a "collage" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <46816435.4070306@wfu.edu> A long, careful note, Jamie. I think that you discriminate among and list out most of the significant considerations and conditions against which our pronouncements should be read if we are committed to learning more about Durrell, whether our particular interest be moral, legal, historical, or literary. I cannot answer your query about a reader of Kathy Acker or William Burroughs, other than to agree in wondering why Durrell's works still are not brought into closer conversation with the writings of those authors. Mind, I would never imagine Durrell the man having much sympathy or correspondence with Acker or Burroughs. His personal sensibilities and politics were entirely different, and in some sense unique to himself. Durrell's political and personal differences from Julio Cortazar were also profound. A long conversation or relationship between them is nearly unimaginable. But I will say that beyond Julio Cortazar I have been unable to discover another twentieth-century novelist of major, global stature who studied and criticized and innovated upon Durrell's fiction to the degree and the significance that Cortazar did in /Hopscotch/. There we have the verifiable evidence for Durrell's shaping influence upon the history of the novel. As I read, mark, and inwardly digest your points and counter-points, let me offer the following passages for collation. I have attached here a pdf document containing scanned excerpts of an early and later instantiation of Durrell's appeal to /collage /technique. Note especially how Durrell revises "a technique of /collage/" into "a system of poetical collage." That revision tells me that Durrell is circling around and trying to focus upon a more exact term for his method--"technique" becomes now a "system," which to me suggests something more programmatic. That said, we are in agreement, I think, that the text of /Caesar's Vast Ghost/ is terribly uncertain ground upon which to pitch the tents of our suppositions. I would want any conclusions drawn to be mindful of application primarily within the bounds of that specific book. And that sort of careful particularization is always a safer working method, for reading literature or studying bibliography in general. I give the relevant citations for the passages in the balloon notes inserted into the pdf document. Charles -- ********************** Charles L. Sligh Department of English Wake Forest University slighcl at wfu.edu ********************** -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070626/8e3f56fd/attachment-0001.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: LD_Provence.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 723757 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070626/8e3f56fd/attachment-0001.pdf From michaelhaag at btinternet.com Tue Jun 26 12:52:31 2007 From: michaelhaag at btinternet.com (MICHAEL HAAG) Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 20:52:31 +0100 (BST) Subject: [ilds] Freud suggests In-Reply-To: <20070626165243.EBSB7351.gx4.fuse.net@bill-hdl5a49h32.email.uc.edu> Message-ID: <359081.14474.qm@web86604.mail.ird.yahoo.com> It is called multiple repetitive readings. It is also called a beserk computer. :Felix --- william godshalk wrote: > I wrote: "Aye there's the rob." > > Michael answered: "I presume 'rob' is intentional." > > >And some people think Doctor Joy was wrong. > > But I got the message four times. Return, return, > return? > > > Bill > > > > *************************************** > W. L. Godshalk * > Department of English * > University of Cincinnati Stellar disorder > * > Cincinnati OH 45221-0069 * > 513-281-5927 > *************************************** > > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > From michaelhaag at btinternet.com Tue Jun 26 12:53:35 2007 From: michaelhaag at btinternet.com (MICHAEL HAAG) Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 20:53:35 +0100 (BST) Subject: [ilds] Freud suggests In-Reply-To: <20070626165243.EBSB7351.gx4.fuse.net@bill-hdl5a49h32.email.uc.edu> Message-ID: <126632.95843.qm@web86611.mail.ird.yahoo.com> It is called multiple repetitive readings. It is also called a beserk computer. :Felix --- william godshalk wrote: > I wrote: "Aye there's the rob." > > Michael answered: "I presume 'rob' is intentional." > > >And some people think Doctor Joy was wrong. > > But I got the message four times. Return, return, > return? > > > Bill > > > > *************************************** > W. L. Godshalk * > Department of English * > University of Cincinnati Stellar disorder > * > Cincinnati OH 45221-0069 * > 513-281-5927 > *************************************** > > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > From godshawl at email.uc.edu Tue Jun 26 13:23:09 2007 From: godshawl at email.uc.edu (william godshalk) Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 16:23:09 -0400 Subject: [ilds] recursive collage In-Reply-To: <126632.95843.qm@web86611.mail.ird.yahoo.com> References: <20070626165243.EBSB7351.gx4.fuse.net@bill-hdl5a49h32.email.uc.edu> <126632.95843.qm@web86611.mail.ird.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20070626202313.CPLF15819.gx6.fuse.net@bill-hdl5a49h32.email.uc.edu> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070626/2c31a8b3/attachment.html From marcpiel at interdesign.fr Tue Jun 26 13:40:29 2007 From: marcpiel at interdesign.fr (Marc Piel) Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 22:40:29 +0200 Subject: [ilds] Durrell suggests a "collage" In-Reply-To: <46816435.4070306@wfu.edu> References: <46816435.4070306@wfu.edu> Message-ID: <468179BD.8050609@interdesign.fr> Thank you Charles for a post "almost comprehensible". The educationalists on this list should oblige yourselves to NOT use similes, m?taphores, and word plays, etc... in your posts. We accept and expect LD to do so, but it is very difficult for us for when you to do so. We read LD for entertainment and intellectual extravagance. We read ( or try to read) your posts in order to learn and understand LD better. The two are very different. So different that sometimes it seems that you are trying to compete with LD. Sorry to be so blunt. Either you are talking to yourselves (bellybuttons - nombriliste) or you are talking to us also. Your choice. Marc slighcl wrote: > A long, careful note, Jamie. I think that you discriminate among and > list out most of the significant considerations and conditions against > which our pronouncements should be read if we are committed to learning > more about Durrell, whether our particular interest be moral, legal, > historical, or literary. > > I cannot answer your query about a reader of Kathy Acker or William > Burroughs, other than to agree in wondering why Durrell's works still > are not brought into closer conversation with the writings of those > authors. Mind, I would never imagine Durrell the man having much > sympathy or correspondence with Acker or Burroughs. His personal > sensibilities and politics were entirely different, and in some sense > unique to himself. > > Durrell's political and personal differences from Julio Cortazar were > also profound. A long conversation or relationship between them is > nearly unimaginable. But I will say that beyond Julio Cortazar I have > been unable to discover another twentieth-century novelist of major, > global stature who studied and criticized and innovated upon Durrell's > fiction to the degree and the significance that Cortazar did in > Hopscotch. There we have the verifiable evidence for Durrell's shaping > influence upon the history of the novel. > > As I read, mark, and inwardly digest your points and counter-points, let > me offer the following passages for collation. I have attached here a > pdf document containing scanned excerpts of an early and later > instantiation of Durrell's appeal to collage technique. Note especially > how Durrell revises "a technique of collage" into "a system of poetical > collage." That revision tells me that Durrell is circling around and > trying to focus upon a more exact term for his method--"technique" > becomes now a "system," which to me suggests something more programmatic. > > That said, we are in agreement, I think, that the text of Caesar's Vast > Ghost is terribly uncertain ground upon which to pitch the tents of our > suppositions. I would want any conclusions drawn to be mindful of > application primarily within the bounds of that specific book. And that > sort of careful particularization is always a safer working method, for > reading literature or studying bibliography in general. > > I give the relevant citations for the passages in the balloon notes > inserted into the pdf document. > > Charles > > -- > ********************** > Charles L. Sligh > Department of English > Wake Forest University > slighcl at wfu.edu > ********************** > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds From godshawl at email.uc.edu Tue Jun 26 13:51:35 2007 From: godshawl at email.uc.edu (william godshalk) Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 16:51:35 -0400 Subject: [ilds] the this-ness of quid In-Reply-To: References: <46807DFC.5030809@wfu.edu> Message-ID: <20070626205149.CVAE15819.gx6.fuse.net@bill-hdl5a49h32.email.uc.edu> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070626/a40f3d55/attachment.html From godshawl at email.uc.edu Tue Jun 26 13:55:03 2007 From: godshawl at email.uc.edu (william godshalk) Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 16:55:03 -0400 Subject: [ilds] Durrell suggests a "collage" In-Reply-To: <468179BD.8050609@interdesign.fr> References: <46816435.4070306@wfu.edu> <468179BD.8050609@interdesign.fr> Message-ID: <20070626205457.UEQI9981.gx5.fuse.net@bill-hdl5a49h32.email.uc.edu> Just think of the mental anguish we anglophones experience when reading M. Derrida!!! Bill At 04:40 PM 6/26/2007, you wrote: >Thank you Charles for a post "almost >comprehensible". The educationalists on this list >should oblige yourselves to NOT use similes, >m?taphores, and word plays, etc... in your posts. >We accept and expect LD to do so, but it is very >difficult for us for when you to do so. We read LD >for entertainment and intellectual extravagance. >We read ( or try to read) your posts in order to >learn and understand LD better. The two are very >different. So different that sometimes it seems >that you are trying to compete with LD. Sorry to >be so blunt. Either you are talking to yourselves >(bellybuttons - nombriliste) or you are talking to >us also. Your choice. >Marc > >slighcl wrote: > > > A long, careful note, Jamie. I think that you discriminate among and > > list out most of the significant considerations and conditions against > > which our pronouncements should be read if we are committed to learning > > more about Durrell, whether our particular interest be moral, legal, > > historical, or literary. > > > > I cannot answer your query about a reader of Kathy Acker or William > > Burroughs, other than to agree in wondering why Durrell's works still > > are not brought into closer conversation with the writings of those > > authors. Mind, I would never imagine Durrell the man having much > > sympathy or correspondence with Acker or Burroughs. His personal > > sensibilities and politics were entirely different, and in some sense > > unique to himself. > > > > Durrell's political and personal differences from Julio Cortazar were > > also profound. A long conversation or relationship between them is > > nearly unimaginable. But I will say that beyond Julio Cortazar I have > > been unable to discover another twentieth-century novelist of major, > > global stature who studied and criticized and innovated upon Durrell's > > fiction to the degree and the significance that Cortazar did in > > Hopscotch. There we have the verifiable evidence for Durrell's shaping > > influence upon the history of the novel. > > > > As I read, mark, and inwardly digest your points and counter-points, let > > me offer the following passages for collation. I have attached here a > > pdf document containing scanned excerpts of an early and later > > instantiation of Durrell's appeal to collage technique. Note especially > > how Durrell revises "a technique of collage" into "a system of poetical > > collage." That revision tells me that Durrell is circling around and > > trying to focus upon a more exact term for his method--"technique" > > becomes now a "system," which to me suggests something more programmatic. > > > > That said, we are in agreement, I think, that the text of Caesar's Vast > > Ghost is terribly uncertain ground upon which to pitch the tents of our > > suppositions. I would want any conclusions drawn to be mindful of > > application primarily within the bounds of that specific book. And that > > sort of careful particularization is always a safer working method, for > > reading literature or studying bibliography in general. > > > > I give the relevant citations for the passages in the balloon notes > > inserted into the pdf document. > > > > Charles > > > > -- > > ********************** > > Charles L. Sligh > > Department of English > > Wake Forest University > > slighcl at wfu.edu > > ********************** > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > _______________________________________________ > > ILDS mailing list > > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds >_______________________________________________ >ILDS mailing list >ILDS at lists.uvic.ca >https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds *************************************** W. L. Godshalk * Department of English * University of Cincinnati Stellar disorder * Cincinnati OH 45221-0069 * 513-281-5927 *************************************** From slighcl at wfu.edu Tue Jun 26 14:45:34 2007 From: slighcl at wfu.edu (slighcl) Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 17:45:34 -0400 Subject: [ilds] Durrell suggests a "collage" In-Reply-To: <468179BD.8050609@interdesign.fr> References: <46816435.4070306@wfu.edu> <468179BD.8050609@interdesign.fr> Message-ID: <468188FE.4000900@wfu.edu> On 6/26/2007 4:40 PM, Marc Piel wrote: >Thank you Charles for a post "almost >comprehensible". The educationalists on this list >should oblige yourselves to NOT use similes, >m?taphores, and word plays, etc... in your posts. > > Dear Marc: With deepest sympathies for your difficulties, I encourage you to keep practicing your reading. Learning to read the English language takes time and trouble, but you will see profit if you persevere. The other "educationalists" on the list will share with you their feeling that, most characteristically, I do not write my emails in academic jargon, critical terminology, or theoretical terms. ("Educationalist" is a very rare word indeed, Marc. It has a Victorian ring to Anglophone ears. Is that word or something like it always used in a pejorative sense in France?) I will admit openly that I do read and study writers who are exemplary prose stylists. And I really must insist that the English language does not stop growing and changing after Lawrence Durrell's death. I doubt that you are sufficiently naive in your use of language to think that any of us can escape using figurative language--i.e., "similes, metaphors, and word plays." All language is representational, standing in for ideas and things not immediately available. Anyone believing otherwise should return immediately to reading Swift's /Gulliver's Travels/: > > We next went to the School of Languages, where three > Professors sate in Consultation upon improving that of their > own country. > > The first Project was to shorten Discourse by cutting > Polysyllables into one, and leaving out Verbs and Participles, > because in reality all things imaginable are but Nouns. > > The other, was a Scheme for entirely abolishing all Words > whatsoever; and this was urged as a great Advantage in Point > of Health as well as Brevity. For it is plain, that every Word > we speak is in some Degree a Diminution of our Lungs by > Corrosion, and consequently contributes to the shortning of > our Lives. An Expedient was therefore offered, that since > Words are only Names for Things, it would be more convenient > for all Men to carry about them, such Things as were necessary > to express the particular Business they are to discourse on. > And this Invention would certainly have taken Place, to the > great Ease as well as Health of the Subject, if the Women in > conjunction with the Vulgar and Illiterate had not threatned > to raise a Rebellion, unless they might be allowed the Liberty > to speak with their Tongues, after the manner of their > Ancestors; such constant irreconcilable Enemies to Science are > the common People. However, many of the most Learned and Wise > adhere to the New Scheme of expressing themselves by Things, > which hath only this Inconvenience attending it, that if a > Man's Business be very great, and of various kinds, he must be > obliged in Proportion to carry a greater bundle of Things upon > his Back, unless he can afford one or two strong Servants to > attend him. I have often beheld two of those Sages almost > sinking under the Weight of their Packs, like Pedlars among > us; who, when they met in the Streets, would lay down their > Loads, open their Sacks, and hold Conversation for an Hour > together; then put up their Implements, help each other to > resume their Burthens, and take their Leave. > > But for short Conversations a Man may carry Implements in his > Pockets and under his Arms, enough to supply him, and in his > House he cannot be at a loss: Therefore the Room where Company > meet who practise this Art, is full of all Things ready at > Hand, requisite to furnish Matter for this kind of artificial > Converse. > > Another great Advantage proposed by this Invention, was that > it would serve as a Universal Language to be understood in all > civilized Nations, whose Goods and Utensils are generally of > the same kind, or nearly resembling, so that their Uses might > easily be comprehended. And thus Embassadors would be > qualified to treat with foreign Princes or Ministers of State > to whose Tongues they were utter Strangers. Perhaps the figure of speech that confused you is the phrase "read, mark, and inwardly digest." Unless these are indeed latter days grown accustomed to lesser singers, that phrase should be somewhat familiar to Anglophone readers. It comes from a collect written into the Anglican /Book of Common Prayer/ in 1549: > Blessed Lord, who caused all holy Scriptures to be written for > our learning: grant us so to hear them, read, mark, learn, and > inwardly digest them, that we may embrace and ever hold fast > the blessed hope of everlasting life, which you have given us > in our Savior Jesus Christ; who lives and reigns with you and > the Holy Spirit, one God, for ever and ever. Amen. That prose in itself contains any number of figures worth parsing. The other phrase in my email involving a figure--"uncertain ground upon which to pitch the tents of our suppositions"--is indeed pretty dense in figure and allusion. Perhaps I was seduced by memories of the seventy tents at Alexandria (cf. Philo) or the Book of Jeremiah ("I have likened the daughter of Zion to a comely and delicate woman. The shepherds with their flocks shall come unto her; they shall pitch their tents against her round about; they shall feed every one in his place.") Christ's lesson about the foundations of our dwelling places also occurs to me. . . . Charles -- ********************** Charles L. Sligh Department of English Wake Forest University slighcl at wfu.edu ********************** -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070626/198f9303/attachment.html From richardpin at eircom.net Tue Jun 26 15:04:36 2007 From: richardpin at eircom.net (Richard Pine) Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 23:04:36 +0100 Subject: [ilds] the this-ness of quid References: <46807DFC.5030809@wfu.edu> <20070626205149.CVAE15819.gx6.fuse.net@bill-hdl5a49h32.email.uc.edu> Message-ID: <002801c7b83d$fe836bd0$574f1359@rpinelaptop> Quiddity is one of the most important Durrellian words, especially when read in conjunction with haeccitas RP ----- Original Message ----- From: william godshalk To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2007 9:51 PM Subject: [ilds] the this-ness of quid Jamie wrote: Somehow, giving up on completeness (an illusion perhaps created when the pure expostulations captured in a notebook are stitched together into an order) is related to collage, literary technique, and that very Durrellian word "quiddity," which I have not seen adequately defined. Here's what the OED comes up with regarding quiddity. Perhaps if we put these together into a Durrellian collage? 1. The real nature or essence of a thing; that which makes a thing what it is. 1569 J. S ANDFORD tr. Agrippa's Van. Artes 21 The true demonstration..is that whiche is made (as the Logitioners speake) by Quiddites, and by the proper difference of thinges. 1628 T. S PENCER Logick 75 Dissent is in the qualitie not the quidditie, or being of the subject. 1670 M AYNWARING Vita Sana x. 106 These notions being too..remote from the quiddity, essence and spring of the Disease. 1710 B ERKELEY Princ. Hum. Knowl. ?81 The positive abstract idea of quiddity, entity, or existence. 1828 DE Q UINCEY Rhetoric Wks. 1862 X. 76 The quiddity, or characteristic difference, of poetry as distinguished from prose. 1897 S. S. S PRIGGE Life of T. Wakley xiii. 125 The quiddity of each attitude was the desire to curtail the privileges of the hospital surgeons. b. Something intangible. rare 1. 1774 B URKE Sp. Amer. Tax. Wks. 1842 I. 158 Fighting for a phantom; a quiddity; a thing that wants, not only a substance, but even a name. 2. A subtlety or captious nicety in argument; a quirk, quibble. (Alluding to scholastic arguments on the 'quiddity' of things.) 1539 T AVERNER Gard. Wysed. I. 18b, [He] must nat playe with hys sophemes and quyddities. 1579 F ULKE Heskins' Parl. 475 Hee saith hee will not vse the quiddities of the schooles, but plaine examples. 1678 R. B ARCLAY Apol. Quakers ?12. 371 To find out and invent subtile Distinctions and Quiddities. 1731 Plain Reas. for Presbyt. Dissent. 138 The most honest cause is often run down with the torrent and speat of law-quirks and quiddities. 1807 W. I RVING Salmag. (1824) 33, I humbly solicit..A quiddity, quirk, or remonstrance to send. 1877 C. G EIKIE Christ xxv. (1879) 281 Their..quiddities and quillets, and casuistical cases. Comb. 1863 DE M ORGAN Pref. in From Matter to Spirit 40, I went back to the old quiddity-mongers. b. Subtlety (of wit); ability or tendency to employ quiddities. 1600 W. W ATSON Decacordon (1602) 140 How shall euer those come in heauen, that haue neither qualitie of body to get it..nor quidditie of wit to keepe it? 1881 W. S. G ILBERT Patience, To stuff his conversation full of quibble and of quiddity. 1884 R. BUCHANNAN in Pall Mall G. 16 Apr., With the intellectual strength and bodily height of an Anak, he possessed the quiddity and animal spirits of Tom Thumb. *************************************** W. L. Godshalk * Department of English * University of Cincinnati Stellar disorder * Cincinnati OH 45221-0069 * 513-281-5927 *************************************** ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ ILDS mailing list ILDS at lists.uvic.ca https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070626/c170ddbe/attachment.html From richardpin at eircom.net Tue Jun 26 15:06:37 2007 From: richardpin at eircom.net (Richard Pine) Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 23:06:37 +0100 Subject: [ilds] Durrell suggests a "collage" References: <46816435.4070306@wfu.edu><468179BD.8050609@interdesign.fr> <20070626205457.UEQI9981.gx5.fuse.net@bill-hdl5a49h32.email.uc.edu> Message-ID: <002f01c7b83e$46a94510$574f1359@rpinelaptop> I'm delighted that Bill has had the courage to make what I take to be a negative - or at least critical - comment on Derridaftness - but we've been down this raod before, last year, if I recall, on the (dis) or (un) importance of theory, a dirty word if ever I saw one. RP ----- Original Message ----- From: "william godshalk" To: ; Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2007 9:55 PM Subject: Re: [ilds] Durrell suggests a "collage" Just think of the mental anguish we anglophones experience when reading M. Derrida!!! Bill At 04:40 PM 6/26/2007, you wrote: >Thank you Charles for a post "almost >comprehensible". The educationalists on this list >should oblige yourselves to NOT use similes, >m?taphores, and word plays, etc... in your posts. >We accept and expect LD to do so, but it is very >difficult for us for when you to do so. We read LD >for entertainment and intellectual extravagance. >We read ( or try to read) your posts in order to >learn and understand LD better. The two are very >different. So different that sometimes it seems >that you are trying to compete with LD. Sorry to >be so blunt. Either you are talking to yourselves >(bellybuttons - nombriliste) or you are talking to >us also. Your choice. >Marc > >slighcl wrote: > > > A long, careful note, Jamie. I think that you discriminate among and > > list out most of the significant considerations and conditions against > > which our pronouncements should be read if we are committed to learning > > more about Durrell, whether our particular interest be moral, legal, > > historical, or literary. > > > > I cannot answer your query about a reader of Kathy Acker or William > > Burroughs, other than to agree in wondering why Durrell's works still > > are not brought into closer conversation with the writings of those > > authors. Mind, I would never imagine Durrell the man having much > > sympathy or correspondence with Acker or Burroughs. His personal > > sensibilities and politics were entirely different, and in some sense > > unique to himself. > > > > Durrell's political and personal differences from Julio Cortazar were > > also profound. A long conversation or relationship between them is > > nearly unimaginable. But I will say that beyond Julio Cortazar I have > > been unable to discover another twentieth-century novelist of major, > > global stature who studied and criticized and innovated upon Durrell's > > fiction to the degree and the significance that Cortazar did in > > Hopscotch. There we have the verifiable evidence for Durrell's shaping > > influence upon the history of the novel. > > > > As I read, mark, and inwardly digest your points and counter-points, let > > me offer the following passages for collation. I have attached here a > > pdf document containing scanned excerpts of an early and later > > instantiation of Durrell's appeal to collage technique. Note especially > > how Durrell revises "a technique of collage" into "a system of poetical > > collage." That revision tells me that Durrell is circling around and > > trying to focus upon a more exact term for his method--"technique" > > becomes now a "system," which to me suggests something more > > programmatic. > > > > That said, we are in agreement, I think, that the text of Caesar's Vast > > Ghost is terribly uncertain ground upon which to pitch the tents of our > > suppositions. I would want any conclusions drawn to be mindful of > > application primarily within the bounds of that specific book. And that > > sort of careful particularization is always a safer working method, for > > reading literature or studying bibliography in general. > > > > I give the relevant citations for the passages in the balloon notes > > inserted into the pdf document. > > > > Charles > > > > -- > > ********************** > > Charles L. Sligh > > Department of English > > Wake Forest University > > slighcl at wfu.edu > > ********************** > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > _______________________________________________ > > ILDS mailing list > > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds >_______________________________________________ >ILDS mailing list >ILDS at lists.uvic.ca >https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds *************************************** W. L. Godshalk * Department of English * University of Cincinnati Stellar disorder * Cincinnati OH 45221-0069 * 513-281-5927 *************************************** _______________________________________________ ILDS mailing list ILDS at lists.uvic.ca https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds From richardpin at eircom.net Tue Jun 26 15:14:14 2007 From: richardpin at eircom.net (Richard Pine) Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 23:14:14 +0100 Subject: [ilds] Durrell suggests a "collage" References: <46816435.4070306@wfu.edu> <468179BD.8050609@interdesign.fr> <468188FE.4000900@wfu.edu> Message-ID: <004501c7b83f$566e7b40$574f1359@rpinelaptop> Why do we read? Not in order to fasten Derridaft meanings onto the text in front of us, but to learn, to be entertained, to assimilate. Theory is a weakness na(t)ive to the catholic mind. No self-respecting protestant would accept theory without questioning it rigorously, because a protestant makes up his/her own mind about something, not what a priest/teacher saqys they must believe, yet millions of kids go thru college today mindlessly accepting the theory that indoctrinates them and removes them from the thrill of reading the texts for themselves. I no longer appreciate Steiner, but what he says about 'Real Presences' still has validity - accept the book for what it is, not for what your teacher tells you Derrida has said about it. Ugh. RP ----- Original Message ----- From: slighcl To: marcpiel at interdesign.fr ; ilds at lists.uvic.ca Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2007 10:45 PM Subject: Re: [ilds] Durrell suggests a "collage" On 6/26/2007 4:40 PM, Marc Piel wrote: Thank you Charles for a post "almost comprehensible". The educationalists on this list should oblige yourselves to NOT use similes, m?taphores, and word plays, etc... in your posts. Dear Marc: With deepest sympathies for your difficulties, I encourage you to keep practicing your reading. Learning to read the English language takes time and trouble, but you will see profit if you persevere. The other "educationalists" on the list will share with you their feeling that, most characteristically, I do not write my emails in academic jargon, critical terminology, or theoretical terms. ("Educationalist" is a very rare word indeed, Marc. It has a Victorian ring to Anglophone ears. Is that word or something like it always used in a pejorative sense in France?) I will admit openly that I do read and study writers who are exemplary prose stylists. And I really must insist that the English language does not stop growing and changing after Lawrence Durrell's death. I doubt that you are sufficiently naive in your use of language to think that any of us can escape using figurative language--i.e., "similes, metaphors, and word plays." All language is representational, standing in for ideas and things not immediately available. Anyone believing otherwise should return immediately to reading Swift's Gulliver's Travels: We next went to the School of Languages, where three Professors sate in Consultation upon improving that of their own country. The first Project was to shorten Discourse by cutting Polysyllables into one, and leaving out Verbs and Participles, because in reality all things imaginable are but Nouns. The other, was a Scheme for entirely abolishing all Words whatsoever; and this was urged as a great Advantage in Point of Health as well as Brevity. For it is plain, that every Word we speak is in some Degree a Diminution of our Lungs by Corrosion, and consequently contributes to the shortning of our Lives. An Expedient was therefore offered, that since Words are only Names for Things, it would be more convenient for all Men to carry about them, such Things as were necessary to express the particular Business they are to discourse on. And this Invention would certainly have taken Place, to the great Ease as well as Health of the Subject, if the Women in conjunction with the Vulgar and Illiterate had not threatned to raise a Rebellion, unless they might be allowed the Liberty to speak with their Tongues, after the manner of their Ancestors; such constant irreconcilable Enemies to Science are the common People. However, many of the most Learned and Wise adhere to the New Scheme of expressing themselves by Things, which hath only this Inconvenience attending it, that if a Man's Business be very great, and of various kinds, he must be obliged in Proportion to carry a greater bundle of Things upon his Back, unless he can afford one or two strong Servants to attend him. I have often beheld two of those Sages almost sinking under the Weight of their Packs, like Pedlars among us; who, when they met in the Streets, would lay down their Loads, open their Sacks, and hold Conversation for an Hour together; then put up their Implements, help each other to resume their Burthens, and take their Leave. But for short Conversations a Man may carry Implements in his Pockets and under his Arms, enough to supply him, and in his House he cannot be at a loss: Therefore the Room where Company meet who practise this Art, is full of all Things ready at Hand, requisite to furnish Matter for this kind of artificial Converse. Another great Advantage proposed by this Invention, was that it would serve as a Universal Language to be understood in all civilized Nations, whose Goods and Utensils are generally of the same kind, or nearly resembling, so that their Uses might easily be comprehended. And thus Embassadors would be qualified to treat with foreign Princes or Ministers of State to whose Tongues they were utter Strangers. Perhaps the figure of speech that confused you is the phrase "read, mark, and inwardly digest." Unless these are indeed latter days grown accustomed to lesser singers, that phrase should be somewhat familiar to Anglophone readers. It comes from a collect written into the Anglican Book of Common Prayer in 1549: Blessed Lord, who caused all holy Scriptures to be written for our learning: grant us so to hear them, read, mark, learn, and inwardly digest them, that we may embrace and ever hold fast the blessed hope of everlasting life, which you have given us in our Savior Jesus Christ; who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, for ever and ever. Amen. That prose in itself contains any number of figures worth parsing. The other phrase in my email involving a figure--"uncertain ground upon which to pitch the tents of our suppositions"--is indeed pretty dense in figure and allusion. Perhaps I was seduced by memories of the seventy tents at Alexandria (cf. Philo) or the Book of Jeremiah ("I have likened the daughter of Zion to a comely and delicate woman. The shepherds with their flocks shall come unto her; they shall pitch their tents against her round about; they shall feed every one in his place.") Christ's lesson about the foundations of our dwelling places also occurs to me. . . . Charles -- ********************** Charles L. Sligh Department of English Wake Forest University slighcl at wfu.edu ********************** ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ ILDS mailing list ILDS at lists.uvic.ca https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070626/608dc3b5/attachment.html From bredwine1968 at earthlink.net Tue Jun 26 15:42:02 2007 From: bredwine1968 at earthlink.net (Bruce Redwine) Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 15:42:02 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [ilds] the this-ness of quid Message-ID: <7489389.1182897722580.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hound.atl.sa.earthlink.net> I feel an attack of the hiccups coming on. Bruce -----Original Message----- >From: Richard Pine >Sent: Jun 26, 2007 3:04 PM >To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca >Subject: Re: [ilds] the this-ness of quid > >Quiddity is one of the most important Durrellian words, especially when read in conjunction with haeccitas RP > ----- Original Message ----- > From: william godshalk > To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca > Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2007 9:51 PM > Subject: [ilds] the this-ness of quid > > > > > Jamie wrote: > > > Somehow, giving up on completeness > (an illusion perhaps created when the pure expostulations captured in a > notebook are stitched together into an order) is related to collage, > literary technique, and that very Durrellian word "quiddity," which I have > not seen adequately defined. > > Here's what the OED comes up with regarding quiddity. Perhaps if we put these together into a Durrellian collage? > > 1. The real nature or essence of a thing; that which makes a thing what it is. > 1569 J. S ANDFORD tr. Agrippa's Van. Artes 21 The true demonstration..is that whiche is made (as the Logitioners speake) by Quiddites, and by the proper difference of thinges. 1628 T. S PENCER Logick 75 Dissent is in the qualitie not the quidditie, or being of the subject. 1670 M AYNWARING Vita Sana x. 106 These notions being too..remote from the quiddity, essence and spring of the Disease. 1710 B ERKELEY Princ. Hum. Knowl. ?81 The positive abstract idea of quiddity, entity, or existence. 1828 DE Q UINCEY Rhetoric Wks. 1862 X. 76 The quiddity, or characteristic difference, of poetry as distinguished from prose. 1897 S. S. S PRIGGE Life of T. Wakley xiii. 125 The quiddity of each attitude was the desire to curtail the privileges of the hospital surgeons. > > b. Something intangible. rare 1. > 1774 B URKE Sp. Amer. Tax. Wks. 1842 I. 158 Fighting for a phantom; a quiddity; a thing that wants, not only a substance, but even a name. > > 2. A subtlety or captious nicety in argument; a quirk, quibble. (Alluding to scholastic arguments on the 'quiddity' of things.) > 1539 T AVERNER Gard. Wysed. I. 18b, [He] must nat playe with hys sophemes and quyddities. 1579 F ULKE Heskins' Parl. 475 Hee saith hee will not vse the quiddities of the schooles, but plaine examples. 1678 R. B ARCLAY Apol. Quakers ?12. 371 To find out and invent subtile Distinctions and Quiddities. 1731 Plain Reas. for Presbyt. Dissent. 138 The most honest cause is often run down with the torrent and speat of law-quirks and quiddities. 1807 W. I RVING Salmag. (1824) 33, I humbly solicit..A quiddity, quirk, or remonstrance to send. 1877 C. G EIKIE Christ xxv. (1879) 281 Their..quiddities and quillets, and casuistical cases. > Comb. 1863 DE M ORGAN Pref. in From Matter to Spirit 40, I went back to the old quiddity-mongers. > > b. Subtlety (of wit); ability or tendency to employ quiddities. > 1600 W. W ATSON Decacordon (1602) 140 How shall euer those come in heauen, that haue neither qualitie of body to get it..nor quidditie of wit to keepe it? 1881 W. S. G ILBERT Patience, To stuff his conversation full of quibble and of quiddity. 1884 R. BUCHANNAN in Pall Mall G. 16 Apr., With the intellectual strength and bodily height of an Anak, he possessed the quiddity and animal spirits of Tom Thumb. > > > *************************************** > W. L. Godshalk * > Department of English * > University of Cincinnati Stellar disorder * > Cincinnati OH 45221-0069 * > 513-281-5927 > *************************************** > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds From bredwine1968 at earthlink.net Tue Jun 26 15:44:46 2007 From: bredwine1968 at earthlink.net (Bruce Redwine) Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 15:44:46 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [ilds] Durrell suggests a Message-ID: <14210539.1182897887615.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hound.atl.sa.earthlink.net> We should ask Ms. Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak for some comments. Bruce -----Original Message----- >From: Richard Pine >Sent: Jun 26, 2007 3:06 PM >To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca >Subject: Re: [ilds] Durrell suggests a "collage" > >I'm delighted that Bill has had the courage to make what I take to be a >negative - or at least critical - comment on Derridaftness - but we've been >down this raod before, last year, if I recall, on the (dis) or (un) >importance of theory, a dirty word if ever I saw one. RP >----- Original Message ----- >From: "william godshalk" >To: ; >Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2007 9:55 PM >Subject: Re: [ilds] Durrell suggests a "collage" > > >Just think of the mental anguish we anglophones >experience when reading M. Derrida!!! > >Bill > >At 04:40 PM 6/26/2007, you wrote: >>Thank you Charles for a post "almost >>comprehensible". The educationalists on this list >>should oblige yourselves to NOT use similes, >>m?taphores, and word plays, etc... in your posts. >>We accept and expect LD to do so, but it is very >>difficult for us for when you to do so. We read LD >>for entertainment and intellectual extravagance. >>We read ( or try to read) your posts in order to >>learn and understand LD better. The two are very >>different. So different that sometimes it seems >>that you are trying to compete with LD. Sorry to >>be so blunt. Either you are talking to yourselves >>(bellybuttons - nombriliste) or you are talking to >>us also. Your choice. >>Marc >> >>slighcl wrote: >> >> > A long, careful note, Jamie. I think that you discriminate among and >> > list out most of the significant considerations and conditions against >> > which our pronouncements should be read if we are committed to learning >> > more about Durrell, whether our particular interest be moral, legal, >> > historical, or literary. >> > >> > I cannot answer your query about a reader of Kathy Acker or William >> > Burroughs, other than to agree in wondering why Durrell's works still >> > are not brought into closer conversation with the writings of those >> > authors. Mind, I would never imagine Durrell the man having much >> > sympathy or correspondence with Acker or Burroughs. His personal >> > sensibilities and politics were entirely different, and in some sense >> > unique to himself. >> > >> > Durrell's political and personal differences from Julio Cortazar were >> > also profound. A long conversation or relationship between them is >> > nearly unimaginable. But I will say that beyond Julio Cortazar I have >> > been unable to discover another twentieth-century novelist of major, >> > global stature who studied and criticized and innovated upon Durrell's >> > fiction to the degree and the significance that Cortazar did in >> > Hopscotch. There we have the verifiable evidence for Durrell's shaping >> > influence upon the history of the novel. >> > >> > As I read, mark, and inwardly digest your points and counter-points, let >> > me offer the following passages for collation. I have attached here a >> > pdf document containing scanned excerpts of an early and later >> > instantiation of Durrell's appeal to collage technique. Note especially >> > how Durrell revises "a technique of collage" into "a system of poetical >> > collage." That revision tells me that Durrell is circling around and >> > trying to focus upon a more exact term for his method--"technique" >> > becomes now a "system," which to me suggests something more >> > programmatic. >> > >> > That said, we are in agreement, I think, that the text of Caesar's Vast >> > Ghost is terribly uncertain ground upon which to pitch the tents of our >> > suppositions. I would want any conclusions drawn to be mindful of >> > application primarily within the bounds of that specific book. And that >> > sort of careful particularization is always a safer working method, for >> > reading literature or studying bibliography in general. >> > >> > I give the relevant citations for the passages in the balloon notes >> > inserted into the pdf document. >> > >> > Charles >> > >> > -- >> > ********************** >> > Charles L. Sligh >> > Department of English >> > Wake Forest University >> > slighcl at wfu.edu >> > ********************** >> > >> > >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > ILDS mailing list >> > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca >> > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds >>_______________________________________________ >>ILDS mailing list >>ILDS at lists.uvic.ca >>https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > >*************************************** >W. L. Godshalk * >Department of English * >University of Cincinnati Stellar disorder * >Cincinnati OH 45221-0069 * >513-281-5927 >*************************************** > > > >_______________________________________________ >ILDS mailing list >ILDS at lists.uvic.ca >https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > >_______________________________________________ >ILDS mailing list >ILDS at lists.uvic.ca >https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds From slighcl at wfu.edu Tue Jun 26 15:52:54 2007 From: slighcl at wfu.edu (slighcl) Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 18:52:54 -0400 Subject: [ilds] Durrell suggests a In-Reply-To: <14210539.1182897887615.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hound.atl.sa.earthlink.net> References: <14210539.1182897887615.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hound.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <468198C6.6090609@wfu.edu> On 6/26/2007 6:44 PM, Bruce Redwine wrote: >We should ask Ms. Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak for some comments. > >Bruce > Yes, but I believe that Homi K Bhabha's prose hurts more to read. CLS -- ********************** Charles L. Sligh Department of English Wake Forest University slighcl at wfu.edu ********************** From godshawl at email.uc.edu Tue Jun 26 15:57:54 2007 From: godshawl at email.uc.edu (william godshalk) Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 18:57:54 -0400 Subject: [ilds] Durrell suggests a In-Reply-To: <468198C6.6090609@wfu.edu> References: <14210539.1182897887615.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hound.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <468198C6.6090609@wfu.edu> Message-ID: <20070626225838.DMBU15819.gx6.fuse.net@bill-hdl5a49h32.email.uc.edu> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070626/7d0b3e21/attachment.html From marcpiel at interdesign.fr Tue Jun 26 15:42:45 2007 From: marcpiel at interdesign.fr (Marc Piel) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2007 00:42:45 +0200 Subject: [ilds] Durrell suggests a "collage" In-Reply-To: <004501c7b83f$566e7b40$574f1359@rpinelaptop> References: <46816435.4070306@wfu.edu> <468179BD.8050609@interdesign.fr> <468188FE.4000900@wfu.edu> <004501c7b83f$566e7b40$574f1359@rpinelaptop> Message-ID: <46819665.90709@interdesign.fr> Surely any religious canalization is restrictive and thus intellectually negative? Richard Pine wrote: > Why do we read? Not in order to fasten Derridaft meanings onto the text > in front of us, but to learn, to be entertained, to assimilate. Theory > is a weakness na(t)ive to the catholic mind. No self-respecting > protestant would accept theory without questioning it rigorously, > because a protestant makes up his/her own mind about something, not what > a priest/teacher saqys they must believe, yet millions of kids go thru > college today mindlessly accepting the theory that indoctrinates them > and removes them from the thrill of reading the texts for themselves. I > no longer appreciate Steiner, but what he says about 'Real Presences' > still has validity - accept the book for what it is, not for what your > teacher tells you Derrida has said about it. Ugh. RP > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: slighcl > To: marcpiel at interdesign.fr ; > ilds at lists.uvic.ca > Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2007 10:45 PM > Subject: Re: [ilds] Durrell suggests a "collage" > > On 6/26/2007 4:40 PM, Marc Piel wrote: > >>Thank you Charles for a post "almost >>comprehensible". The educationalists on this list >>should oblige yourselves to NOT use similes, >>m?taphores, and word plays, etc... in your posts. >> > > Dear Marc: > > With deepest sympathies for your difficulties, I encourage you to > keep practicing your reading. Learning to read the English > language takes time and trouble, but you will see profit if you > persevere. The other "educationalists" on the list will share with > you their feeling that, most characteristically, I do not write my > emails in academic jargon, critical terminology, or theoretical > terms. ("Educationalist" is a very rare word indeed, Marc. It has > a Victorian ring to Anglophone ears. Is that word or something like > it always used in a pejorative sense in France?) > > I will admit openly that I do read and study writers who are > exemplary prose stylists. And I really must insist that the English > language does not stop growing and changing after Lawrence Durrell's > death. I doubt that you are sufficiently naive in your use of > language to think that any of us can escape using figurative > language--i.e., "similes, metaphors, and word plays." All language > is representational, standing in for ideas and things not > immediately available. Anyone believing otherwise should return > immediately to reading Swift's Gulliver's Travels: > >> >> We next went to the School of Languages, where three >> Professors sate in Consultation upon improving that of >> their own country. >> >> The first Project was to shorten Discourse by cutting >> Polysyllables into one, and leaving out Verbs and >> Participles, because in reality all things imaginable are >> but Nouns. >> >> The other, was a Scheme for entirely abolishing all Words >> whatsoever; and this was urged as a great Advantage in >> Point of Health as well as Brevity. For it is plain, that >> every Word we speak is in some Degree a Diminution of our >> Lungs by Corrosion, and consequently contributes to the >> shortning of our Lives. An Expedient was therefore >> offered, that since Words are only Names for Things, it >> would be more convenient for all Men to carry about them, >> such Things as were necessary to express the particular >> Business they are to discourse on. And this Invention >> would certainly have taken Place, to the great Ease as >> well as Health of the Subject, if the Women in conjunction >> with the Vulgar and Illiterate had not threatned to raise >> a Rebellion, unless they might be allowed the Liberty to >> speak with their Tongues, after the manner of their >> Ancestors; such constant irreconcilable Enemies to Science >> are the common People. However, many of the most Learned >> and Wise adhere to the New Scheme of expressing themselves >> by Things, which hath only this Inconvenience attending >> it, that if a Man's Business be very great, and of various >> kinds, he must be obliged in Proportion to carry a greater >> bundle of Things upon his Back, unless he can afford one >> or two strong Servants to attend him. I have often beheld >> two of those Sages almost sinking under the Weight of >> their Packs, like Pedlars among us; who, when they met in >> the Streets, would lay down their Loads, open their Sacks, >> and hold Conversation for an Hour together; then put up >> their Implements, help each other to resume their >> Burthens, and take their Leave. >> >> But for short Conversations a Man may carry Implements in >> his Pockets and under his Arms, enough to supply him, and >> in his House he cannot be at a loss: Therefore the Room >> where Company meet who practise this Art, is full of all >> Things ready at Hand, requisite to furnish Matter for this >> kind of artificial Converse. >> >> Another great Advantage proposed by this Invention, was >> that it would serve as a Universal Language to be >> understood in all civilized Nations, whose Goods and >> Utensils are generally of the same kind, or nearly >> resembling, so that their Uses might easily be >> comprehended. And thus Embassadors would be qualified to >> treat with foreign Princes or Ministers of State to whose >> Tongues they were utter Strangers. > > > Perhaps the figure of speech that confused you is the phrase "read, > mark, and inwardly digest." Unless these are indeed latter days > grown accustomed to lesser singers, that phrase should be somewhat > familiar to Anglophone readers. It comes from a collect written > into the Anglican Book of Common Prayer in 1549: > >> Blessed Lord, who caused all holy Scriptures to be written >> for our learning: grant us so to hear them, read, mark, >> learn, and inwardly digest them, that we may embrace and >> ever hold fast the blessed hope of everlasting life, which >> you have given us in our Savior Jesus Christ; who lives >> and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, for ever >> and ever. Amen. > > That prose in itself contains any number of figures worth parsing. > > The other phrase in my email involving a figure--"uncertain ground > upon which to pitch the tents of our suppositions"--is indeed pretty > dense in figure and allusion. Perhaps I was seduced by memories of > the seventy tents at Alexandria (cf. Philo) or the Book of Jeremiah > ("I have likened the daughter of Zion to a comely and delicate > woman. The shepherds with their flocks shall come unto her; they > shall pitch their tents against her round about; they shall feed > every one in his place.") Christ's lesson about the foundations of > our dwelling places also occurs to me. . . . > > Charles > > -- > ********************** > Charles L. Sligh > Department of English > Wake Forest University > slighcl at wfu.edu > ********************** > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds From bredwine1968 at earthlink.net Tue Jun 26 16:01:17 2007 From: bredwine1968 at earthlink.net (Bruce Redwine) Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 16:01:17 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [ilds] Durrell suggests a Message-ID: <893496.1182898877955.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hybrid.atl.sa.earthlink.net> All kinds of Deconstructionists and their offspring. Take Paul de Man, for example, French lucidity resulting in Germanic opacity. And the life reflected the prose. Bruce -----Original Message----- >From: slighcl >Sent: Jun 26, 2007 3:52 PM >To: Bruce Redwine , ilds at lists.uvic.ca >Subject: Re: [ilds] Durrell suggests a > >On 6/26/2007 6:44 PM, Bruce Redwine wrote: > >>We should ask Ms. Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak for some comments. >> >>Bruce >> >Yes, but I believe that Homi K Bhabha's prose hurts more to read. > >CLS From bredwine1968 at earthlink.net Tue Jun 26 16:03:46 2007 From: bredwine1968 at earthlink.net (Bruce Redwine) Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 16:03:46 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [ilds] Durrell suggests a Message-ID: <2661350.1182899027287.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hybrid.atl.sa.earthlink.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070626/5aa1e23f/attachment.html From godshawl at email.uc.edu Tue Jun 26 16:22:10 2007 From: godshawl at email.uc.edu (william godshalk) Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 19:22:10 -0400 Subject: [ilds] Durrell suggests a In-Reply-To: <2661350.1182899027287.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hybrid.atl.sa. earthlink.net> References: <2661350.1182899027287.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hybrid.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <20070626232204.UXPW9981.gx5.fuse.net@bill-hdl5a49h32.email.uc.edu> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070626/2277985a/attachment.html From godshawl at email.uc.edu Tue Jun 26 16:52:40 2007 From: godshawl at email.uc.edu (william godshalk) Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 19:52:40 -0400 Subject: [ilds] Durrell suggests a "collage" In-Reply-To: <468188FE.4000900@wfu.edu> References: <46816435.4070306@wfu.edu> <468179BD.8050609@interdesign.fr> <468188FE.4000900@wfu.edu> Message-ID: <20070626235334.DREO15819.gx6.fuse.net@bill-hdl5a49h32.email.uc.edu> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070626/010e474d/attachment.html From bredwine1968 at earthlink.net Tue Jun 26 17:46:13 2007 From: bredwine1968 at earthlink.net (Bruce Redwine) Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 17:46:13 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [ilds] Durrell suggests a "collage" Message-ID: <33382431.1182905174098.JavaMail.root@elwamui-cypress.atl.sa.earthlink.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070626/8c2ac8be/attachment.html From godshawl at email.uc.edu Tue Jun 26 17:52:13 2007 From: godshawl at email.uc.edu (william godshalk) Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 20:52:13 -0400 Subject: [ilds] Durrell at the "round about" In-Reply-To: <33382431.1182905174098.JavaMail.root@elwamui-cypress.atl.s a.earthlink.net> References: <33382431.1182905174098.JavaMail.root@elwamui-cypress.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <20070627005218.VIQB9981.gx5.fuse.net@bill-hdl5a49h32.email.uc.edu> At 08:46 PM 6/26/2007, you wrote: >About Crazy Jane? > >Bruce No, about what a "round about" is, and what a "tent" may be. *************************************** W. L. Godshalk * Department of English * University of Cincinnati Stellar disorder * Cincinnati OH 45221-0069 * 513-281-5927 *************************************** From godshawl at email.uc.edu Tue Jun 26 18:13:57 2007 From: godshawl at email.uc.edu (william godshalk) Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 21:13:57 -0400 Subject: [ilds] illiterate half of the time In-Reply-To: <20070627005218.VIQB9981.gx5.fuse.net@bill-hdl5a49h32.email .uc.edu> References: <33382431.1182905174098.JavaMail.root@elwamui-cypress.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <20070627005218.VIQB9981.gx5.fuse.net@bill-hdl5a49h32.email.uc.edu> Message-ID: <20070627014852.HIEV7351.gx4.fuse.net@bill-hdl5a49h32.email.uc.edu> On another list, one of the members said that she had heard that Renaissance aristocrats were illiterate half of the time. I cannot get this concept out of my mind. Bill *************************************** W. L. Godshalk * Department of English * University of Cincinnati Stellar disorder * Cincinnati OH 45221-0069 * 513-281-5927 *************************************** From bredwine1968 at earthlink.net Tue Jun 26 18:58:33 2007 From: bredwine1968 at earthlink.net (Bruce Redwine) Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 18:58:33 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [ilds] illiterate half of the time Message-ID: <10196373.1182909514275.JavaMail.root@elwamui-muscovy.atl.sa.earthlink.net> You mean, she meant they could turn their literacy on and off? Now that's a thought. Bruce -----Original Message----- >From: william godshalk >Sent: Jun 26, 2007 6:13 PM >To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca >Subject: [ilds] illiterate half of the time > >On another list, one of the members said that she had heard that >Renaissance aristocrats were illiterate half of the time. > >I cannot get this concept out of my mind. > >Bill >*************************************** >W. L. Godshalk * >Department of English * >University of Cincinnati Stellar disorder * >Cincinnati OH 45221-0069 * >513-281-5927 >*************************************** > > >_______________________________________________ >ILDS mailing list >ILDS at lists.uvic.ca >https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds From godshawl at email.uc.edu Tue Jun 26 19:00:20 2007 From: godshawl at email.uc.edu (william godshalk) Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 22:00:20 -0400 Subject: [ilds] signing off and Durrell's art of conflation In-Reply-To: <20070627014852.HIEV7351.gx4.fuse.net@bill-hdl5a49h32.email .uc.edu> References: <33382431.1182905174098.JavaMail.root@elwamui-cypress.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <20070627005218.VIQB9981.gx5.fuse.net@bill-hdl5a49h32.email.uc.edu> <20070627014852.HIEV7351.gx4.fuse.net@bill-hdl5a49h32.email.uc.edu> Message-ID: <20070627020143.EFXD15819.gx6.fuse.net@bill-hdl5a49h32.email.uc.edu> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070626/d48a7eeb/attachment.html From godshawl at email.uc.edu Tue Jun 26 19:02:54 2007 From: godshawl at email.uc.edu (william godshalk) Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 22:02:54 -0400 Subject: [ilds] illiterate only half of the time In-Reply-To: <10196373.1182909514275.JavaMail.root@elwamui-muscovy.atl.s a.earthlink.net> References: <10196373.1182909514275.JavaMail.root@elwamui-muscovy.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <20070627020328.VTYO9981.gx5.fuse.net@bill-hdl5a49h32.email.uc.edu> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070626/72a1a57d/attachment.html From michaelhaag at btinternet.com Tue Jun 26 19:56:22 2007 From: michaelhaag at btinternet.com (MICHAEL HAAG) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2007 03:56:22 +0100 (BST) Subject: [ilds] Catholics In-Reply-To: <46819665.90709@interdesign.fr> Message-ID: <710782.23999.qm@web86609.mail.ird.yahoo.com> Was Lawrence Durrell a closet Catholic? If not, why are his books filled with the names of notable Catholics? :Michael --- Marc Piel wrote: > Surely any religious canalization is restrictive > and thus intellectually negative? > > Richard Pine wrote: > > Why do we read? Not in order to fasten Derridaft > meanings onto the text > > in front of us, but to learn, to be entertained, > to assimilate. Theory > > is a weakness na(t)ive to the catholic mind. No > self-respecting > > protestant would accept theory without questioning > it rigorously, > > because a protestant makes up his/her own mind > about something, not what > > a priest/teacher saqys they must believe, yet > millions of kids go thru > > college today mindlessly accepting the theory that > indoctrinates them > > and removes them from the thrill of reading the > texts for themselves. I > > no longer appreciate Steiner, but what he says > about 'Real Presences' > > still has validity - accept the book for what it > is, not for what your > > teacher tells you Derrida has said about it. Ugh. > RP > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: slighcl > > To: marcpiel at interdesign.fr > ; > > ilds at lists.uvic.ca > > Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2007 10:45 PM > > Subject: Re: [ilds] Durrell suggests a > "collage" > > > > On 6/26/2007 4:40 PM, Marc Piel wrote: > > > >>Thank you Charles for a post "almost > >>comprehensible". The educationalists on this list > >>should oblige yourselves to NOT use similes, > >>m?taphores, and word plays, etc... in your posts. > >> > > > > Dear Marc: > > > > With deepest sympathies for your difficulties, > I encourage you to > > keep practicing your reading. Learning to > read the English > > language takes time and trouble, but you will > see profit if you > > persevere. The other "educationalists" on > the list will share with > > you their feeling that, most > characteristically, I do not write my > > emails in academic jargon, critical > terminology, or theoretical > > terms. ("Educationalist" is a very rare word > indeed, Marc. It has > > a Victorian ring to Anglophone ears. Is that > word or something like > > it always used in a pejorative sense in > France?) > > > > I will admit openly that I do read and study > writers who are > > exemplary prose stylists. And I really must > insist that the English > > language does not stop growing and changing > after Lawrence Durrell's > > death. I doubt that you are sufficiently > naive in your use of > > language to think that any of us can escape > using figurative > > language--i.e., "similes, metaphors, and word > plays." All language > > is representational, standing in for ideas and > things not > > immediately available. Anyone believing > otherwise should return > > immediately to reading Swift's Gulliver's > Travels: > > > >> > >> We next went to the School of > Languages, where three > >> Professors sate in Consultation upon > improving that of > >> their own country. > >> > >> The first Project was to shorten > Discourse by cutting > >> Polysyllables into one, and leaving > out Verbs and > >> Participles, because in reality all > things imaginable are > >> but Nouns. > >> > >> The other, was a Scheme for entirely > abolishing all Words > >> whatsoever; and this was urged as a > great Advantage in > >> Point of Health as well as Brevity. > For it is plain, that > >> every Word we speak is in some Degree > a Diminution of our > >> Lungs by Corrosion, and consequently > contributes to the > >> shortning of our Lives. An Expedient > was therefore > >> offered, that since Words are only > Names for Things, it > >> would be more convenient for all Men > to carry about them, > >> such Things as were necessary to > express the particular > >> Business they are to discourse on. > And this Invention > >> would certainly have taken Place, to > the great Ease as > >> well as Health of the Subject, if the > Women in conjunction > >> with the Vulgar and Illiterate had > not threatned to raise > >> a Rebellion, unless they might be > allowed the Liberty to > >> speak with their Tongues, after the > manner of their > >> Ancestors; such constant > irreconcilable Enemies to Science > >> are the common People. However, many > of the most Learned > >> and Wise adhere to the New Scheme of > expressing themselves > >> by Things, which hath only this > Inconvenience attending > >> it, that if a Man's Business be very > great, and of various > >> kinds, he must be obliged in > Proportion to carry a greater > >> bundle of Things upon his Back, > unless he can afford one > >> or two strong Servants to attend him. > I have often beheld > >> two of those Sages almost sinking > under the Weight of > >> their Packs, like Pedlars among us; > who, when they met in > >> the Streets, would lay down their > Loads, open their Sacks, > >> and hold Conversation for an Hour > together; then put up > >> their Implements, help each other to > resume their > >> Burthens, and take their Leave. > >> > >> But for short Conversations a Man > may carry Implements in > >> his Pockets and under his Arms, > enough to supply him, and > >> in his House he cannot be at a loss: > Therefore the Room > >> where Company meet who practise this > Art, is full of all > >> Things ready at Hand, requisite to > furnish Matter for this > >> kind of artificial Converse. > >> > >> Another great Advantage proposed by > this Invention, was > >> that it would serve as a Universal > Language to be > >> understood in all civilized Nations, > whose Goods and > >> Utensils are generally of the same > kind, or nearly > >> resembling, so that their Uses might > easily be > >> comprehended. And thus Embassadors > would be qualified to > >> treat with foreign Princes or > Ministers of State to whose > >> Tongues they were utter Strangers. > > > > > > Perhaps the figure of speech that confused you > is the phrase "read, > > mark, and inwardly digest." Unless these are > indeed latter days > > grown accustomed to lesser singers, that > phrase should be somewhat > > familiar to Anglophone readers. It comes from > a collect written > > into the Anglican Book of Common Prayer in > 1549: > > > >> Blessed Lord, who caused all holy > Scriptures to be written > >> for our learning: grant us so to hear > them, read, mark, > === message truncated === From michaelhaag at btinternet.com Tue Jun 26 19:59:25 2007 From: michaelhaag at btinternet.com (MICHAEL HAAG) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2007 03:59:25 +0100 (BST) Subject: [ilds] Durrell suggests a In-Reply-To: <20070626225838.DMBU15819.gx6.fuse.net@bill-hdl5a49h32.email.uc.edu> Message-ID: <220396.21103.qm@web86602.mail.ird.yahoo.com> I thought Homi was cutting-edge. I read that in a book somewhere, something to do with Durrell and Pineapples. :Michael --- william godshalk wrote: --------------------------------- Yes, but I believe that Homi K Bhabha's prose hurts more to read. O, com'on. Homi is a laugh a minute. *************************************** W. L.Godshalk * Department ofEnglish * University ofCincinnati Stellar disorder * Cincinnati OH 45221-0069 * 513-281-5927 ***************************************> _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > From michaelhaag at btinternet.com Tue Jun 26 20:03:02 2007 From: michaelhaag at btinternet.com (MICHAEL HAAG) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2007 04:03:02 +0100 (BST) Subject: [ilds] illiterate half of the time In-Reply-To: <20070627014852.HIEV7351.gx4.fuse.net@bill-hdl5a49h32.email.uc.edu> Message-ID: <737133.54009.qm@web86607.mail.ird.yahoo.com> Which half? :Michael --- william godshalk wrote: > On another list, one of the members said that she > had heard that > Renaissance aristocrats were illiterate half of the > time. > > I cannot get this concept out of my mind. > > Bill > *************************************** > W. L. Godshalk * > Department of English * > University of Cincinnati Stellar disorder > * > Cincinnati OH 45221-0069 * > 513-281-5927 > *************************************** > > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > From michaelhaag at btinternet.com Tue Jun 26 20:03:21 2007 From: michaelhaag at btinternet.com (MICHAEL HAAG) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2007 04:03:21 +0100 (BST) Subject: [ilds] illiterate half of the time In-Reply-To: <20070627014852.HIEV7351.gx4.fuse.net@bill-hdl5a49h32.email.uc.edu> Message-ID: <490070.17544.qm@web86609.mail.ird.yahoo.com> Which half? :Michael --- william godshalk wrote: > On another list, one of the members said that she > had heard that > Renaissance aristocrats were illiterate half of the > time. > > I cannot get this concept out of my mind. > > Bill > *************************************** > W. L. Godshalk * > Department of English * > University of Cincinnati Stellar disorder > * > Cincinnati OH 45221-0069 * > 513-281-5927 > *************************************** > > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > From bskordil at otenet.gr Tue Jun 26 23:24:13 2007 From: bskordil at otenet.gr (Beatrice Skordili) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2007 09:24:13 +0300 Subject: [ilds] Freud suggests References: <19999090.1182877726043.JavaMail.root@elwamui-little.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <006501c7b883$c9196620$58f44955@lacan> A recent issue of the Scientific American (2006)suggests that modern developments in neuroscience justify by and large Freud's metapsychology. I am between houses right now, but I will get the reference in a couple of days for those who might like to go beyond ... well, facile doxa. Beatrice "Freud wasn't always wrong. He was just mainly a fraud." Bruce From richardpin at eircom.net Wed Jun 27 01:34:19 2007 From: richardpin at eircom.net (Richard Pine) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2007 09:34:19 +0100 Subject: [ilds] Durrell suggests a "collage" References: <46816435.4070306@wfu.edu><468179BD.8050609@interdesign.fr> <468188FE.4000900@wfu.edu> <20070626235334.DREO15819.gx6.fuse.net@bill-hdl5a49h32.email.uc.edu> Message-ID: <008301c7b895$f70b2890$954e1359@rpinelaptop> 'It makes you think'. Which is more than you can say for theory. RP ----- Original Message ----- From: william godshalk To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2007 12:52 AM Subject: Re: [ilds] Durrell suggests a "collage" they shall pitch their tents against her round about; Charlie quotes, and I wonder about those who shall "pitch their tents" against her "round about." It makes you think. Bill *************************************** W. L. Godshalk * Department of English * University of Cincinnati Stellar disorder * Cincinnati OH 45221-0069 * 513-281-5927 *************************************** ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ ILDS mailing list ILDS at lists.uvic.ca https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070627/9e93c9e3/attachment.html From bredwine1968 at earthlink.net Wed Jun 27 06:53:57 2007 From: bredwine1968 at earthlink.net (Bruce Redwine) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2007 06:53:57 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [ilds] Freud Message-ID: <26055282.1182952437929.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hound.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Read: F. C. Crews, Unauthorized Freud: Doubters Confront a Legend, Viking 1998. J. Kerr, A Most Dangerous Method: The Story of Jung, Freud, and Sabina Spielrein, Knopf, 1993. M. Macmillan, Freud Evaluated: The Completed Arc, MIT, 1997. Honi soyt qui mal pense. Which might be said of Sigi. Bruce -----Original Message----- >From: Beatrice Skordili >Sent: Jun 26, 2007 11:24 PM >To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca >Subject: Re: [ilds] Freud suggests > >A recent issue of the Scientific American (2006)suggests that modern >developments in neuroscience justify by and large Freud's metapsychology. I >am between houses right now, but I will get the reference in a couple of >days for those who might like to go beyond ... well, facile doxa. > >Beatrice > > >"Freud wasn't always wrong. He was just mainly a fraud." > >Bruce > > >_______________________________________________ >ILDS mailing list >ILDS at lists.uvic.ca >https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds From slighcl at wfu.edu Wed Jun 27 07:17:42 2007 From: slighcl at wfu.edu (slighcl) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2007 10:17:42 -0400 Subject: [ilds] RG Justine 4 -- what to say? In-Reply-To: <26055282.1182952437929.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hound.atl.sa.earthlink.net> References: <26055282.1182952437929.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hound.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <46827186.6080802@wfu.edu> Does anyone have any observations about Part 4 of /Justine/? Once again, I find Part 4 the difficult part of the book for me to appreciate. Part 1 lays down the layered, necessary spirit of place and character sketches. Parts 2 and 3 have Balthazar's lost key, Cohen's death, Scobie, the mysterious figure shadowed on the frosted glass, the Summer Palace at Abousir, Nessim's "great cycle of historical dreams," and the Duck Shoot. All of those moments are inescapable for me. But Part 4 fails to engage my interest. In Part 4 Darley has lost most of his important "reflectors"--the other characters through which he realizes his story. Perhaps there is a pattern here? A bit of a problem with closure, a prospect which might very well not be in tune with Durrell's evolving project in the /Quartet/. 4 & 4: Dissatisfaction with the fourth part of /Justine /gives me a premonition of dissatisfaction with /Clea/. And there is a name common to both--Clea. I find her letters and her presence wearying. I am happy to be convinced that I have overlooked much. Please help. Charles -- ********************** Charles L. Sligh Department of English Wake Forest University slighcl at wfu.edu ********************** -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070627/8e93f6d8/attachment.html From marcpiel at interdesign.fr Wed Jun 27 07:35:41 2007 From: marcpiel at interdesign.fr (Marc Piel) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2007 16:35:41 +0200 Subject: [ilds] Freud In-Reply-To: <26055282.1182952437929.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hound.atl.sa.earthlink.net> References: <26055282.1182952437929.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hound.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <468275BD.3070603@interdesign.fr> "Honni soit qui mal y pense" The origin: when french was the spoken language in the english royal house: Elle n'est pas encore tout ? fait oubli?e, cette tr?s vieille formule. Elle a m?me, en 2001, servi de titre ? un ouvrage d'Henriette Walter : il y est question des relations linguistiques ? et sociales, par la force des choses ? entre la France et l'Angleterre. L'Angleterre, vous savez pourquoi ? C'est que la devise " Honni soit qui mal y pense " ? en fran?ais, bien s?r : la langue de la Cour d'Angleterre du temps d'?douard III, en 1348 ? y ?tait, mieux : y est encore la devise de l'Ordre de la Jarreti?re. Je vous raconte l'anecdote ? La comtesse de Salisbury laissa un jour tomber ? terre la jarreti?re bleue de sa jambe gauche. Galant, le roi ?douard la ramasse et la rend ? la comtesse. Rumeurs diverses des courtisans : on les imagine facilement. Le roi, irrit?, les fait taire en leur disant : " Honni soit qui mal y pense ". Et en ajoutant ironiquement qu'ils n'?taient pas tous certains d'obtenir un jour l'Ordre de la Jarreti?re, qu'il venait ainsi de fonder. Il subsiste encore, avec ses? vingt-cinq, oui, pas un de plus, chevaliers. Bruce Redwine wrote: > Read: > > F. C. Crews, Unauthorized Freud: Doubters Confront a Legend, Viking 1998. > J. Kerr, A Most Dangerous Method: The Story of Jung, Freud, and Sabina Spielrein, Knopf, 1993. > M. Macmillan, Freud Evaluated: The Completed Arc, MIT, 1997. > > Honi soyt qui mal pense. Which might be said of Sigi. > > Bruce > > > -----Original Message----- > >>From: Beatrice Skordili >>Sent: Jun 26, 2007 11:24 PM >>To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca >>Subject: Re: [ilds] Freud suggests >> >>A recent issue of the Scientific American (2006)suggests that modern >>developments in neuroscience justify by and large Freud's metapsychology. I >>am between houses right now, but I will get the reference in a couple of >>days for those who might like to go beyond ... well, facile doxa. >> >>Beatrice >> >> >>"Freud wasn't always wrong. He was just mainly a fraud." >> >>Bruce >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>ILDS mailing list >>ILDS at lists.uvic.ca >>https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > From bredwine1968 at earthlink.net Wed Jun 27 09:47:38 2007 From: bredwine1968 at earthlink.net (Bruce Redwine) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2007 09:47:38 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [ilds] Freud and the Garter Message-ID: <22732634.1182962858729.JavaMail.root@elwamui-mouette.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Many thanks for the anecdote, Marc, appropriately enough in French. Now, what would the originator of the infamous "Seduction Theory" have to say about that story? Bruce -----Original Message----- >From: Marc Piel >Sent: Jun 27, 2007 7:35 AM >To: Bruce Redwine , ilds at lists.uvic.ca >Subject: Re: [ilds] Freud > >"Honni soit qui mal y pense" > >The origin: when french was the spoken language in >the english royal house: >Elle n'est pas encore tout ? fait oubli?e, cette >tr?s vieille formule. Elle a m?me, en 2001, servi >de titre ? un ouvrage d'Henriette Walter : il y >est question des relations linguistiques ? et >sociales, par la force des choses ? entre la >France et l'Angleterre. L'Angleterre, vous savez >pourquoi ? C'est que la devise " Honni soit qui >mal y pense " ? en fran?ais, bien s?r : la langue >de la Cour d'Angleterre du temps d'?douard III, en >1348 ? y ?tait, mieux : y est encore la devise de >l'Ordre de la Jarreti?re. Je vous raconte >l'anecdote ? La comtesse de Salisbury laissa un >jour tomber ? terre la jarreti?re bleue de sa >jambe gauche. Galant, le roi ?douard la ramasse et >la rend ? la comtesse. Rumeurs diverses des >courtisans : on les imagine facilement. Le roi, >irrit?, les fait taire en leur disant : " Honni >soit qui mal y pense ". Et en ajoutant >ironiquement qu'ils n'?taient pas tous certains >d'obtenir un jour l'Ordre de la Jarreti?re, qu'il >venait ainsi de fonder. Il subsiste encore, avec >ses? vingt-cinq, oui, pas un de plus, chevaliers. > >Bruce Redwine wrote: > >> Read: >> >> F. C. Crews, Unauthorized Freud: Doubters Confront a Legend, Viking 1998. >> J. Kerr, A Most Dangerous Method: The Story of Jung, Freud, and Sabina Spielrein, Knopf, 1993. >> M. Macmillan, Freud Evaluated: The Completed Arc, MIT, 1997. >> >> Honi soyt qui mal pense. Which might be said of Sigi. >> >> Bruce >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >>>From: Beatrice Skordili >>>Sent: Jun 26, 2007 11:24 PM >>>To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca >>>Subject: Re: [ilds] Freud suggests >>> >>>A recent issue of the Scientific American (2006)suggests that modern >>>developments in neuroscience justify by and large Freud's metapsychology. I >>>am between houses right now, but I will get the reference in a couple of >>>days for those who might like to go beyond ... well, facile doxa. >>> >>>Beatrice >>> >>> >>>"Freud wasn't always wrong. He was just mainly a fraud." >>> >>>Bruce > From bredwine1968 at earthlink.net Wed Jun 27 11:15:52 2007 From: bredwine1968 at earthlink.net (Bruce Redwine) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2007 11:15:52 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [ilds] RG Justine 4 -- what to say? Message-ID: <79912.1182968152570.JavaMail.root@elwamui-norfolk.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Charles, what a strange thing to say -- especially for a good Victorianist, who frolics in the heyday of the novel's closed ending. I can only take this as dissatisfaction with Darley himself. Whom, once bereft of his friends and tormentors, you find wanting. The ending doesn't bother me. In fact, I enjoy it, especially the emergence of Clea. It's near perfect. It's a wrapping up, a return to the problems of the beginning, and a kind of open goodbye. Michael Haag has written a fine piece on "departures" in Durrell ("On the City is Real: Lawrence Durrell's Journey to Alexandria," Alif 26 (2006). I refer you to that, if you haven't already seen it. The ending, however, is a good test for evaluating reader expectations. Which is another way to ask, what kind of novel is Justine? Some comments on the Gnostic silence at the end? The rest is not silence. Bruce -----Original Message----- >From: slighcl >Sent: Jun 27, 2007 7:17 AM >To: Bruce Redwine , ilds at lists.uvic.ca >Subject: RG Justine 4 -- what to say? > >Does anyone have any observations about Part 4 of /Justine/? > >Once again, I find Part 4 the difficult part of the book for me to >appreciate. Part 1 lays down the layered, necessary spirit of place and >character sketches. Parts 2 and 3 have Balthazar's lost key, Cohen's >death, Scobie, the mysterious figure shadowed on the frosted glass, the >Summer Palace at Abousir, Nessim's "great cycle of historical dreams," >and the Duck Shoot. All of those moments are inescapable for me. But >Part 4 fails to engage my interest. In Part 4 Darley has lost most of >his important "reflectors"--the other characters through which he >realizes his story. > >Perhaps there is a pattern here? A bit of a problem with closure, a >prospect which might very well not be in tune with Durrell's evolving >project in the /Quartet/. 4 & 4: Dissatisfaction with the fourth part >of /Justine /gives me a premonition of dissatisfaction with /Clea/. And >there is a name common to both--Clea. I find her letters and her >presence wearying. > >I am happy to be convinced that I have overlooked much. Please help. > >Charle From vcel at ix.netcom.com Wed Jun 27 07:53:58 2007 From: vcel at ix.netcom.com (Vittorio Celentano) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2007 10:53:58 -0400 Subject: [ilds] Freud References: <26055282.1182952437929.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hound.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <468275BD.3070603@interdesign.fr> Message-ID: <000701c7b8ca$fe5e0e70$ed525645@vittoriohx7smy> Marc Is it not "Honi soit qui mal y pense?" Vittorio Celentano ----- Original Message ----- From: "Marc Piel" To: "Bruce Redwine" ; Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2007 10:35 AM Subject: Re: [ilds] Freud "Honni soit qui mal y pense" The origin: when french was the spoken language in the english royal house: Elle n'est pas encore tout ? fait oubli?e, cette tr?s vieille formule. Elle a m?me, en 2001, servi de titre ? un ouvrage d'Henriette Walter : il y est question des relations linguistiques ? et sociales, par la force des choses ? entre la France et l'Angleterre. L'Angleterre, vous savez pourquoi ? C'est que la devise " Honni soit qui mal y pense " ? en fran?ais, bien s?r : la langue de la Cour d'Angleterre du temps d'?douard III, en 1348 ? y ?tait, mieux : y est encore la devise de l'Ordre de la Jarreti?re. Je vous raconte l'anecdote ? La comtesse de Salisbury laissa un jour tomber ? terre la jarreti?re bleue de sa jambe gauche. Galant, le roi ?douard la ramasse et la rend ? la comtesse. Rumeurs diverses des courtisans : on les imagine facilement. Le roi, irrit?, les fait taire en leur disant : " Honni soit qui mal y pense ". Et en ajoutant ironiquement qu'ils n'?taient pas tous certains d'obtenir un jour l'Ordre de la Jarreti?re, qu'il venait ainsi de fonder. Il subsiste encore, avec ses? vingt-cinq, oui, pas un de plus, chevaliers. Bruce Redwine wrote: > Read: > > F. C. Crews, Unauthorized Freud: Doubters Confront a Legend, Viking 1998. > J. Kerr, A Most Dangerous Method: The Story of Jung, Freud, and Sabina Spielrein, Knopf, 1993. > M. Macmillan, Freud Evaluated: The Completed Arc, MIT, 1997. > > Honi soyt qui mal pense. Which might be said of Sigi. > > Bruce > > > -----Original Message----- > >>From: Beatrice Skordili >>Sent: Jun 26, 2007 11:24 PM >>To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca >>Subject: Re: [ilds] Freud suggests >> >>A recent issue of the Scientific American (2006)suggests that modern >>developments in neuroscience justify by and large Freud's metapsychology. I >>am between houses right now, but I will get the reference in a couple of >>days for those who might like to go beyond ... well, facile doxa. >> >>Beatrice >> >> >>"Freud wasn't always wrong. He was just mainly a fraud." >> >>Bruce >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>ILDS mailing list >>ILDS at lists.uvic.ca >>https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > _______________________________________________ ILDS mailing list ILDS at lists.uvic.ca https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds From slighcl at wfu.edu Wed Jun 27 12:14:25 2007 From: slighcl at wfu.edu (slighcl) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2007 15:14:25 -0400 Subject: [ilds] RG Justine 4 -- what to say? In-Reply-To: <79912.1182968152570.JavaMail.root@elwamui-norfolk.atl.sa.earthlink.net> References: <79912.1182968152570.JavaMail.root@elwamui-norfolk.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <4682B711.6080309@wfu.edu> On 6/27/2007 2:15 PM, Bruce Redwine wrote: >Charles, what a strange thing to say -- especially for a good Victorianist, who frolics in the heyday of the novel's closed ending. I can only take this as dissatisfaction with Darley himself. Whom, once bereft of his friends and tormentors, you find wanting. The ending doesn't bother me. In fact, I enjoy it, especially the emergence of Clea. It's near perfect. It's a wrapping up, a return to the problems of the beginning, and a kind of open goodbye. Michael Haag has written a fine piece on "departures" in Durrell ("On the City is Real: Lawrence Durrell's Journey to Alexandria," Alif 26 (2006). I refer you to that, if you haven't already seen it. The ending, however, is a good test for evaluating reader expectations. Which is another way to ask, what kind of novel is Justine? Some comments on the Gnostic silence at the end? The rest is not silence. > Yes, Bruce, you have right points here. I walked about this afternoon thinking about the ending to /Justine/, an ending which I have been making in regular fashion for so many years now. It is not a problem for me of "open" or "closed" endings. Each sort of finish to a novel has its function and its import if it is accomplished in the right way. I am just as happy with the supposed closure of Victorian novels as I am with the advertised openness of Modernist works. I read Pynchon's /V./ and /Gravity's Rainbow/ and /The Alexandria Quartet/ all about the same moment--the summer of my fifteenth year--so as you point out my readerly expectation of narratives, novels, and the sense of their endings is no doubt already highly mobile, schizophrenic, skipping across and playing along different tracks. One interesting facet of /Justine /is that it begins in Part 1 with Darley having reached a most striking "ending." Darley's backward glance from the island interests me more in its evocative presentation (the island moments and memories of Alex) than the ending in these last few pages do. In other words, /Justine /starts out in the elegiac mode and mood--lives and loves finished, what remains is retrospect. The striking beauty and strangeness of the opening exceeds what the closing accomplishes, I think. I have already made an honest disclosure that Durrell and Darley's privileging of Clea bothers me. She seems to be granted too much privilege, in every sense. Having said all of this, I will note that the "Work Points / Consequential Data" do interest and please me. The "character-squeezes." (Teresa di Petromonti, Ptolomeo Dandolo, Fuad El Said, &c.) The little snippets, clippings from notebooks left on the cutting room floor but kept about as tokens of inspiration, to be set out like tea leaves or Tarot patterns, to be read in the Durrellian, ludic way. And the translations of Cavafy. /There /I do see something happening, an ending which lives up to the promise of /Justine /entire. This novel needs a poem or even poems to open it up and out to future possibilities. "The God Abandons Antony" read aloud in a Durrellian inflection is a much better exit point than Clea's letter. Charles -- ********************** Charles L. Sligh Department of English Wake Forest University slighcl at wfu.edu ********************** -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070627/a89ee3f8/attachment.html From bredwine1968 at earthlink.net Wed Jun 27 13:21:17 2007 From: bredwine1968 at earthlink.net (Bruce Redwine) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2007 13:21:17 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [ilds] RG Justine 4 -- what to say? Message-ID: <26645869.1182975677995.JavaMail.root@elwamui-karabash.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Charles, I don't see this. Or rather, I don't feel this, since we're really talking about "moods" and how the novel satisfies them. We're also talking about Darley's/Durrell's growth, and if he ends where he started, there's not much satisfaction there. The ending, where the "cicadas are throbbing in the great planes," that ending -- not Clea's letter -- what that coda does for me, as powerfully as Cavafy's "God Abandons Antony," is to combine the note of loss with the chance of another beginning. I don't see how Justine could have possibly served as a vehicle for that alternative, whereas Clea can (and I sense that Durrell, perhaps desperately, wants this, in terms of his own life). True, Clea's been lurking on the margins of the story, and she suddenly springs into prominence, but this doesn't bother me. I tend to read the novel biographically and have largely equated Clea with Claude Vincendon, although Michael Haag mentions Clea Badaro as a prototype. Claude appears on Cyprus, if I have this right, when Durrell is struggling with the novel, and she literally becomes his dea ex machina. So I understand all that and take it into consideration. Others share your objections, however. Henry Miller also objected to the epistolary ending. Bruce >-----Original Message----- >>From: slighcl >>Sent: Jun 27, 2007 12:14 PM >>To: Bruce Redwine , ilds at lists.uvic.ca >>Subject: Re: [ilds] RG Justine 4 -- what to say? > >>In other words, /Justine /starts out in the elegiac mode >>and mood--lives and loves finished, what remains is retrospect. The >>striking beauty and strangeness of the opening exceeds what the closing >>accomplishes, I think. >> >>I have already made an honest disclosure that Durrell and Darley's >>privileging of Clea bothers me. She seems to be granted too much >>privilege, in every sense. >> > >>This novel needs a poem or even poems to open it up and out to future >>possibilities. "The God Abandons Antony" read aloud in a Durrellian >>inflection is a much better exit point than Clea's letter. >> >>Charles >> >> From slighcl at wfu.edu Wed Jun 27 13:30:11 2007 From: slighcl at wfu.edu (slighcl) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2007 16:30:11 -0400 Subject: [ilds] RG Justine 4 -- what to say? In-Reply-To: <79912.1182968152570.JavaMail.root@elwamui-norfolk.atl.sa.earthlink.net> References: <79912.1182968152570.JavaMail.root@elwamui-norfolk.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <4682C8D3.40303@wfu.edu> I did quite enjoy one special aspect of the opening movement of Part 4. Durrell has Darley blend and mix together the disappearances of his lovers into something larger than their assortment, something that looks ahead to the larger movement of Alexandria refunding itself into memory (4.4). At the opening of Part 4, Darley notes that he and Nessim at once share the loss of Justine and are separated critically by her absence. "It was as if she had removed the keystone to an arch" (4.1). Then Darley sees in Nessim's suffering a vivid reminder of his own feelings during his last meeting with Melissa "before she left for the clinic in Jerusalem" (4.1). This works well because we have already witnessed the Nessim/Melissa & Darley/Justine exchange in 3.4. Every sexual act involves four persons, as someone said in an epigraph. And then having set this up this interchange of sympathy and similarity between lost beloveds and left-behind lovers, Darley offers the words of another old lover, Arnauti, words perfectly chosen in that they begin with "her going," an open reference, an open space waiting to be filled by desire--a possessive pronoun we know should be referring to Arnauti's "Claudia/Justine." But here, in the wake of the vivid memory of Melissa's departure for Jerusalem, "her going" is now opened up for a brief moment to include Melissa by its mood and by Darley's associations: "With her going the city took on an unnerving strangeness for him" (4.1). But only for a brief moment. The fact that Darley follows this passage from Arnauti with a paragraph opening "the night after Justine went away" seems to capture something of Darley's predicament. As much as he wants to promise Melissa that she should "never doubt it," his thoughts are still haunted by Justine. This play of interchange among lovers recalls for me Darley's ability to overcome his disgust for the dying Cohen in 2.5. It is there that Darley realizes that he too will one day be a discarded lover like Cohen. And then of course Pursewarden and Da Capo and Arnauti are very present here. "Four persons" may be an insufficient number. CLS -- ********************** Charles L. Sligh Department of English Wake Forest University slighcl at wfu.edu ********************** From odos.fanourios at gmail.com Wed Jun 27 16:19:44 2007 From: odos.fanourios at gmail.com (James Gifford) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2007 17:19:44 -0600 Subject: [ilds] RG Justine 4 -- what to say? In-Reply-To: <79912.1182968152570.JavaMail.root@elwamui-norfolk.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: How provocative for both Bruce and Charles... I suppose I'll start with the most striking part of the ending of _Justine_, which is something that both made me stumble in my own first reading and has influenced my approach to the book in the classroom, hopefully making others unexpectedly trip as well. Bruce asks for an evaluation of the novel based on the ending, specifically writing, > Some comments on the Gnostic silence at > the end? The rest is not silence. I don't know if I would call this a Gnostic silence, but I like your pun on Hamlet -- I must also admit to having used it in a discussion of gaps in Durrell and Miller (I used it as a bad joke). Cringe if you like: "to return to the allusion that prompted the Hamlet correspondence from which my title derives, 'The rest is silence' (V.ii 311). Silent as the grave, the moment of rest is a silence, but like the rest in a musical language, the gap of it prompts a response." I've always read the ending of _Justine_ in that manner -- not silence that rests (after all, we have the workpoints to continue working with...) but as a prompt to more reading. Apart from the poor punning allusion, that last sentence of _Justine_ brings together multiple threads in our discussion so far: FABER (both _Justine_ in all its editions and in the omnibus) reads: .... I have decided to leave Clea's last letter unanswered. I no longer wish to coerce anyone, to make promises, to think of life in terms of compacts, resolutions, covenants. It will be up to Clea to interpret my silence according to her own needs and desires, to come to me if she has need or not, as the case may be. Does not everything* depend on our interpretation of the silence around us. So that.... * in the notes then points to a blank page DUTTON reads differently: .... I have decided to leave Clea's last letter unanswered. I no longer wish to coerce anyone, to make promises, to think of life in terms of compacts, resolutions, covenants. It will be up to Clea to interpret my silence according to her own needs and desires, to come to me if she has need or not, as the case may be. Does not everything depend on our interpretation of the silence around us. I can't find the CARDINAL edition at the moment, but I believe it has the "So that..." but not the endnote to the blank page. Perhaps someone with it ready to hand can check that. Now, I know Michael will say Durrell had nothing to do with the Dutton editions, but I'm still not convinced that there's a clear paper trail. I'm willing to be proved wrong. What we do have is an editorial silencing of silence. We also have the inanimate objects listed in the preceding paragraph, which we also know has variants, and which Beatrice has discussed so adroitly. But, Darley's refusal to continue the correspondence (and hence the novel) is not a mute silence... "So that" is also the ending of Ezra Pound's Canto I. I doubt Durrell would have done that accidentally. Moreover, the silence is specific. Darley is writing about a letter from Clea that offers him a way to close his "brief introductory memorial to Alexandria." Even if he didn't have a specific continuation in mind, that "introductory" description would seem far from final. Also, the silence of Darley's ending is really the silence of his failure to reply to the letter -- the paper trail comes to a sudden end when someone fails to engage or respond. Yet, that refusal is itself something that can be read and interpreted -- and like the reader, the interpretation is based on Clea's "needs and desires." That's a call of open interpretations by the reader if I ever saw one... Add to that Darley's description of all correspondences (such as those in _Justine_ as "Unreal," and our established trend continues (that's in 4.2). So: 4.1 wraps up the loose threads with Justine, Nessim and Darley's relationship, and sees Melissa's departure -- it also contains Darley's first (chaste) night with Clea. Let's also not forget that letters from Justine play a key role in this section. 4.2 wraps up with Melissa's death and his correspondence with her (letters again!), the arrangements for the child with Nessim, and Nessim's becoming "truly Alexandria" while Darley becomes ever-more introspective and distanced from desire. I've read this shift as a reflection of the epigraphs. 4.3 focuses on correspondence with Clea, again with a letter, in which she summarizes the nature of the events with the characters (the '(un)happily ever after' of the narrative), including Darley's move into solitude. 4.4 finishes by giving us Darley's reflections on correspondence, another instance of the "Unreal" (this time it is the unreality of time). Against this unreality of memory, the past, and time, we have Darley in a position of being "always" beside the water -- what an odd movement, making the future and the past 'Unreal' while the present moment becomes "always." It reminds me of Durrell's own early letter to Henry Miller in which he claims to be " I AM SLOWLY BUT VERY CAREFULLY AND WITHOUT ANY CONSCIOUS THOUGHT DESTROYING TIME" -- even that letter was written in direct response to a specific text, but I'm keeping that under my hat for the time being... Suffice to say, it's in perfect continuity for Durrell to end _Justine_ in this manner. Charles also asks: > Perhaps there is a pattern here? A bit of a > problem with closure, a prospect which might > very well not be in tune with Durrell's evolving > project in the /Quartet/. 4 & 4: Humm... It is intriguing that _Justine_ begins with 4 sections and leads to the _Quartet_, albeit in a not-so-pre-planned manner, as Michael has demonstrated -- *and* _Monsieur_ begins with 5 sections leading into the rest of the _Quintet_. My personal suspicion is that the fourth section of _Justine_ had to epistolary to some degree, and it needed to remove Darley from Sade's crime I the city -- the result is never going to be as exciting, no matter what we think of the option given by Freud for talk. It ties together the novel, opens up the textual recuperations and repetitions, almost pointing us back for close reading and an "auto-analysis" of our own readings of the novel, and suggests some of the more important conceptual apparatuses behind the novel. I'm personally very fond of the language in 4.4, so I might disagree with Charles. But then, there are still the Workpoints, and the novel is not done until we read Cavafy... There are so many repetitions from those two poems, textual fragments floating about inside the novel, that reaching 4.4 and then the end of the Workpoints really ought to send the reader back into the book for a fresh re-interpretations. In other words, we copy Darley's journey through the experience to the repetition of the experience in memory, and in doing so we parallel the crime of the character's pleasure to the talk (healing) of recuperating and analysing that "unreal" past in the "always" present. I think that's enough for one email... Best, James From slighcl at wfu.edu Wed Jun 27 17:39:09 2007 From: slighcl at wfu.edu (slighcl) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2007 20:39:09 -0400 Subject: [ilds] RG Justine 4 -- what to say? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4683032D.3050309@wfu.edu> On 6/27/2007 7:19 PM, James Gifford wrote: >I'm personally very fond of the language in 4.4, so I might disagree >with Charles. > > > No need to worry, Jamie. I think that 4.4's affinity with 1.1+ is finely done. Echoic, with hints of possible forward movement. Perhaps what I should have concentrated upon is my agon with Clea's letter--4.3. Again, this is an issue of a personal taste built up over two decades of reading the /Quartet/. After all of that time, I still have not come to welcome Clea's arrival. However, unlike slow old me, Bruce is able to see what Durrell is about here, so I know Clea brings something to the book. An admission: I am writing all of this as an invitation discover who enjoys and appreciates Clea's presence. Clea fans speak up. Let us not take her for granted. Tell us why we should defer to her letter as it is given in /Justine/. I have faith that I can learn. What I mean: I think Durrell allows this letter an unusual place of privilege in its voice and in its positioning here at the close of the novel. If I could quickly pinpoint what aggravates me, it would be this: With the character Justine, we are advised not to seek final answers because she is an enigma. With Clea, we are advised that questioning is not even allowed. It is fair enough for Clea to hold court on the flawed Darley. I just wish she received more interrogation. >But then, there are still the Workpoints, and the novel is not done until we >read Cavafy... There are so many repetitions from those two poems, textual >fragments floating about inside the novel, that reaching 4.4 and then the >end of the Workpoints really ought to send the reader back into the book for >a fresh re-interpretations. > I have never read a sufficient exploration of the Workpoints. Are they as unique as I have always taken them to be? In the eighteenth and nineteenth century Pope and Byron would have called the Workpoints the "machinery." Today, after Genette, the critical term might be "paratext"--some printed matter accompanying the text, something occupying a "threshold" position. I say /might be /because I am extremely uncertain about the closeness of the Workpoints relationship to the text. Does /Justine /end with 4.4 or with the Workpoints or*? I think Durrell does a magnificent job here, whether in serious experimentation, out of an inability to excise favorite notes, or on a lark to set up literary critics who like to over-conceptualize. No doubt we not make these possibilities exclusive. Durrell might have confessed or denied any of them at anytime. But beyond that I am less interested in Durrell's intention than in the Workpoints' effect. I marked those Workpoints as something different, something unlike anything I had read when I was fifteen. These days I still like the way in which they recall Durrell's quarry books for me. They are "consequential" in that they remind me that the structure of /Justine /is something like a notebook with jottings and set pieces kept aside until they might be set into some sort of significant order. Try looking into any verso of Durrell's Justine's notebooks, and you will find similar jottings, some of which gestated to term, some of which went unrealized. Another free cast, via a useful contrast: How are the Workpoints different from the epilogues, appendices, recipes, calendars, and remedies attached to /Prospero's Cell/ or /Reflections on a Marine Venus/? I find those appended documents are omewhat changed when I read them again after /Justine/. What might have been seen as miscellany in a travel book now becomes artistic flourish. Charles * -- ********************** Charles L. Sligh Department of English Wake Forest University slighcl at wfu.edu ********************** -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070627/c8be87b7/attachment.html From odos.fanourios at gmail.com Wed Jun 27 18:07:04 2007 From: odos.fanourios at gmail.com (James Gifford) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2007 19:07:04 -0600 Subject: [ilds] RG Justine 4 -- what to say? In-Reply-To: <4683032D.3050309@wfu.edu> Message-ID: Charles asks: > An admission: I am writing all of this as an > invitation discover who enjoys and appreciates > Clea's presence. Clea fans speak up. Let us > not take her for granted. I'll agree there -- Clea is not my favourite character, though I also don't read the book for character... I must admit that I don't know what any of them would look like if I ran into them on the street -- not only would such an encounter signal a psychotic episode, the impossibility of it marks my absence of feeling for them as characters. I think the only character I like is Melissa. But, who is the only character in the novel that you would want a sibling to end up with... > Tell us why we should defer to her letter as > it is given in Justine.... What I mean: I > think Durrell allows this letter an unusual > place of privilege in its voice and in its > positioning here at the close of the novel. Claude... More seriously though (not that I'm discounting Claude's importance here), Clea is the only other character who struggles against the noose of unselfconscious desire -- she's far more like Darley than we would think, and it's almost sad that we do not have a companion volume to the _Quartet_ narrated from Clea's position of observation. She is unburdening herself of the illnesses of past pursuits, much like Darley, and memory holds her secretly to that past. They are both moving from Sade to Freud, and conveniently they are doing so in opposition to the same woman. In Clea, Darley confronts his competing lovers and the anxieties that have driven him -- he cannot answer her, but three books later they find they can talk... Also, how would you like _Justine_ if every character was thoroughly pinned in place at the end? I think some last retreat from the world is necessary at that moment, and Clea's letter is certainly an invocation to rejoin that world -- Darley needs to back away somehow, even now that he's on his island, and in not telling Clea's story, he demonstrates that he can lay down his pen. So long as he is answering the letters, he is only deceiving himself by running away. If we go through Clea too thoroughly, or if there's a letter from Justine (the unmitigated statement from her own hand), then somehow the effect wouldn't be right. I also think it needed to be a woman since a letter from Nessim would resolve the situation with the child (ever after land) while a letter from Balthazar would fuel a new form or technique. It has to be Clea, who was there at all times, but never influenced the action in any discernable way. But, I wonder about your agon, Charles. I've felt that as well, both with books and film or ever television series. What propels you to dislike Clea? I've always found Justine pathetic in the colloquial sense and Melissa pathetic in the poetic sense -- I'm sure I could analyse that further... Best, Jamie From slighcl at wfu.edu Wed Jun 27 18:14:57 2007 From: slighcl at wfu.edu (slighcl) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2007 21:14:57 -0400 Subject: [ilds] RG Justine 4 -- what to say? In-Reply-To: <4683032D.3050309@wfu.edu> References: <4683032D.3050309@wfu.edu> Message-ID: <46830B91.5070107@wfu.edu> On 6/27/2007 8:39 PM, slighcl wrote: > No doubt we [need] not make these possibilities exclusive. > Try looking into any verso of Durrell's Justine['s] notebooks > I find those appended documents are [s]omewhat changed when I read > them again after /Justine/. What might have been seen as miscellany > in a travel book now becomes artistic flourish. My goodness. I am having keyboard issues. This comes from reading /Justine /and typing notes while stepping in and out of the kitchen to wash dishes. Full apologies for the sloppy takes. Charles -- ********************** Charles L. Sligh Department of English Wake Forest University slighcl at wfu.edu ********************** -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070627/5f20fdd4/attachment.html From slighcl at wfu.edu Wed Jun 27 18:27:51 2007 From: slighcl at wfu.edu (slighcl) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2007 21:27:51 -0400 Subject: [ilds] RG Justine 4 -- what to say? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <46830E97.4030508@wfu.edu> On 6/27/2007 9:07 PM, James Gifford wrote: >But, I wonder about your agon, Charles. I've felt that as well, both with >books and film or ever television series. What propels you to dislike Clea? >I've always found Justine pathetic in the colloquial sense and Melissa >pathetic in the poetic sense -- I'm sure I could analyse that further... > I wonder this myself. I am certain that it would be revealing. Balthazar also enjoys some special privileges in the novel. Balthazar can gently chide Darley as necessary. But we have plenty of examples in which we are endeared to Balthazar since we see him in completely human moments of tenderness (tucking in his sleeping companion) and befuddlement (the lost watch key). Clea seems not to partake in those little mortalities--just a lot of prohibitions--don't ask, don't question why I am not married, don't make love to me, &c. In a City in which nothing is forbidden, such prohibitions seem suspect. But strange to say I do hare your affection for Melissa, Jamie. It grows stronger with each reading, with my interest in the character Justine lessening each time. Are we sentimental readers? Your notion of poetic pathos seems better. Charles -- ********************** Charles L. Sligh Department of English Wake Forest University slighcl at wfu.edu ********************** From odos.fanourios at gmail.com Wed Jun 27 18:40:16 2007 From: odos.fanourios at gmail.com (James Gifford) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2007 19:40:16 -0600 Subject: [ilds] RG Justine 4 -- what to say? In-Reply-To: <46830E97.4030508@wfu.edu> Message-ID: Charles notes: > But strange to say I do share your affection for > Melissa, Jamie. It grows stronger with each > reading, with my interest in the character > Justine lessening each time. Are we sentimental > readers? Your notion of poetic pathos seems > better. I'm not sure of 'better,' but I read Melissa in a manner very much akin to the little black boy in Blake's poem of that title -- he has the unfulfillable wish for wholeness and love that can never be fulfilled, and the pathos of that is darkened further by Blake's accompanying painting wherein even after the granting of his closing wish, he is still excluded from the adoring gaze of the pure love he seeks. The pathos of unattainable longing. Melissa bothers me in the same way, and I suspect she bothered Durrell very much as well. I know we'll have to wait for Michael to comment on this, but I once asked Margo Durrell if Melissa, Iolanthe, Sylvie, Gracie, and Ruth were the same person, someone special. Melissa's pathos runs from the beginning to the end of Durrell's oeuvre, and he end in Justine 4.3 catches me. Best, Jamie From slighcl at wfu.edu Wed Jun 27 18:43:04 2007 From: slighcl at wfu.edu (slighcl) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2007 21:43:04 -0400 Subject: [ilds] RG Justine 4 -- what to say? In-Reply-To: <46830E97.4030508@wfu.edu> References: <46830E97.4030508@wfu.edu> Message-ID: <46831228.3070701@wfu.edu> On 6/27/2007 9:27 PM, slighcl wrote: >But strange to say I do [s]hare your affection for Melissa, Jamie. > Strangely slipshod on the "s" key tonight. Wilde once talked about someone conducting his education in public. . . . -- ********************** Charles L. Sligh Department of English Wake Forest University slighcl at wfu.edu ********************** From bredwine1968 at earthlink.net Thu Jun 28 06:27:46 2007 From: bredwine1968 at earthlink.net (Bruce Redwine) Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 09:27:46 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [ilds] RG Justine 4 -- what to say? Message-ID: <18317766.1183037266600.JavaMail.root@elwamui-karabash.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Not many comments on silence at the end of Justine. Here's a good one, a practical, non-literary, non-theoretical approach. By the way, I wouldn't have advised LD to add "So that . . . " at the end. It's hard to know when to stop, which makes endings difficult. Bruce >-----Original Message----- >From: "durrell at telstra.com" >Sent: Jun 27, 2007 10:33 PM >To: Bruce Redwine >Subject: Re: [ilds] RG Justine 4 -- what to say? > >Bruce.....I note your comments on the power of silence...The most >powerful part of therapy is of course the ending....the separation.... >where the reality of aloneness must be confronted, processed and >ultimately savoured as a formidable facet of the quiddity of >being.....as a psychiatrist one soon knows the therapy has been fruitful >if the ending has labour pains....the other really valuable insight with >regards to therapy is that "penny dropping" insights are nearly always >heralded by bouts of silence in therapy....so silence is golden in many >ways for it is fertile in its pluripotentiality and often catalyses an >inner reunion with the faint whispers of intuitive wisdom too often >drowned out by unnecessary mental chatter....best drd From slighcl at wfu.edu Thu Jun 28 07:08:49 2007 From: slighcl at wfu.edu (slighcl) Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 10:08:49 -0400 Subject: [ilds] RG Justine 4 -- what to say? In-Reply-To: <18317766.1183037266600.JavaMail.root@elwamui-karabash.atl.sa.earthlink.net> References: <18317766.1183037266600.JavaMail.root@elwamui-karabash.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <4683C0F1.9030903@wfu.edu> On 6/28/2007 9:27 AM, Bruce Redwine wrote: >Not many comments on silence at the end of Justine. Here's a good one, a practical, non-literary, non-theoretical approach. By the way, I wouldn't have advised LD to add "So that . . . " at the end. It's hard to know when to stop, which makes endings difficult. > > > > >>-----Original Message----- >>From: "durrell at telstra.com" >> >>so silence is golden in many >>ways for it is fertile in its pluripotentiality and often catalyses an >>inner reunion with the faint whispers of intuitive wisdom too often >>drowned out by unnecessary mental chatter.... >> I shall add my chatter against the silence and say something that I perhaps recall Jamie hinting out in an earlier email. (I certainly have been pointing it out in my attention to the Workpoints.) I find precious little room for silence at the end of /Justine/. Instead, it is all pretty frenetic. First, as Jamie has said, there is Darley's decision not to answer Clea's letter. That "silence" actually makes a statement and provokes thought. The withholding of an answer certainly makes Clea and the reader of /Justine /ponder what it is all about. Darley expects this response in what could be interpreted either as "respect" for Clea or a passive-aggressive manipulation of her "absurd desire" (4.3). Even if we readers pretend to some sort of enlightenment and strike up an /Om /of appreciation we are still interpreting that silent space. And then there comes the business about "Does not everything* depend upon our interpretation of the silence around us? So that. . . . The asterisk and the ellipses incite activity and and interpretation and noise. Those in turn are followed by a whole array of Workpoints, which Durrell's original designation insisted had "con-sequence." This last part--the Workpoints--is now one of my favorite parts of /Justine/. Finally, to give a gnostic reading, the arrival of /Balthazar /in 1958 showed that Old D the Demiurge won out. No /silencio /here. Instead of renouncing "chatter" we get the Interlinear, creations piled atop creations piled atop creations. And the novelist can pay his bills and move to the South of France. I am grateful for those real world conditions--that they gave us the /Quartet/. /Felix culpa/. Has anyone asked the question, "What if Durrell had stopped here? What if there had only ever been /Justine/?" I am imagining Durrell withdrawing from the world and not writing after 1957. Or perhaps some motoring accident /a la/ Scobie /p?re /in which the writer's scarf gets caught up in the tyre. . . . How might that change our notion of Lawrence Durrell and how would it have changed his critical reception? How would we have interpreted that silence? (Sorry, Jamie. This alternative history pretty much cancels out the appearance of the /Quintet/.) Charles -- ********************** Charles L. Sligh Department of English Wake Forest University slighcl at wfu.edu ********************** -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070628/358d070c/attachment.html From richardpin at eircom.net Thu Jun 28 00:31:03 2007 From: richardpin at eircom.net (Richard Pine) Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 08:31:03 +0100 Subject: [ilds] RG Justine 4 -- what to say? References: Message-ID: <008c01c7b956$4b2b3f80$618ce9d5@rpinelaptop> Character? What did LD say? 'It's not the characters that are particularly interesting - it's the line of enquiry'. RP ----- Original Message ----- From: "James Gifford" To: Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 2:07 AM Subject: Re: [ilds] RG Justine 4 -- what to say? > Charles asks: > >> An admission: I am writing all of this as an >> invitation discover who enjoys and appreciates >> Clea's presence. Clea fans speak up. Let us >> not take her for granted. > > I'll agree there -- Clea is not my favourite character, though I also > don't > read the book for character... I must admit that I don't know what any of > them would look like if I ran into them on the street -- not only would > such > an encounter signal a psychotic episode, the impossibility of it marks my > absence of feeling for them as characters. I think the only character I > like is Melissa. But, who is the only character in the novel that you > would > want a sibling to end up with... > >> Tell us why we should defer to her letter as >> it is given in Justine.... What I mean: I >> think Durrell allows this letter an unusual >> place of privilege in its voice and in its >> positioning here at the close of the novel. > > Claude... > > More seriously though (not that I'm discounting Claude's importance here), > Clea is the only other character who struggles against the noose of > unselfconscious desire -- she's far more like Darley than we would think, > and it's almost sad that we do not have a companion volume to the > _Quartet_ > narrated from Clea's position of observation. She is unburdening herself > of > the illnesses of past pursuits, much like Darley, and memory holds her > secretly to that past. They are both moving from Sade to Freud, and > conveniently they are doing so in opposition to the same woman. In Clea, > Darley confronts his competing lovers and the anxieties that have driven > him > -- he cannot answer her, but three books later they find they can talk... > > Also, how would you like _Justine_ if every character was thoroughly > pinned > in place at the end? I think some last retreat from the world is > necessary > at that moment, and Clea's letter is certainly an invocation to rejoin > that > world -- Darley needs to back away somehow, even now that he's on his > island, and in not telling Clea's story, he demonstrates that he can lay > down his pen. So long as he is answering the letters, he is only > deceiving > himself by running away. If we go through Clea too thoroughly, or if > there's a letter from Justine (the unmitigated statement from her own > hand), > then somehow the effect wouldn't be right. I also think it needed to be a > woman since a letter from Nessim would resolve the situation with the > child > (ever after land) while a letter from Balthazar would fuel a new form or > technique. It has to be Clea, who was there at all times, but never > influenced the action in any discernable way. > > But, I wonder about your agon, Charles. I've felt that as well, both with > books and film or ever television series. What propels you to dislike > Clea? > I've always found Justine pathetic in the colloquial sense and Melissa > pathetic in the poetic sense -- I'm sure I could analyse that further... > > Best, > Jamie > > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > From bredwine1968 at earthlink.net Thu Jun 28 09:44:02 2007 From: bredwine1968 at earthlink.net (Bruce Redwine) Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 09:44:02 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [ilds] RG Justine 4 -- what to say? Message-ID: <25631707.1183049043176.JavaMail.root@elwamui-ovcar.atl.sa.earthlink.net> I disagree with Charles's interpretation of the ending to Justine and the uses or misuses, as he suggests, of silence. But the disagreement is welcomed, because it highlights two very different approaches to reading the novel. If I may categorize Charles, he is the respected critic (no irony here) giving a literary analysis -- logically correct in many ways. He is pointing out inconsistencies in Durrell's method. How things don't work, or how they contradict themselves. But that's not the way I respond to the ending. I don't care that invoking silence breaks silence and that tacking on "Workpoints" only functions as more clamor. The former I shrug off as a problem with language itself, the latter I attribute to the author intruding and playing his games. I allow him to have a little fun -- it's his book, after all -- and who says the critic's sensibilities have to prevail? No, I read the ending in a way Dr. Anthony Durrell suggests, that is, silence serves as a kind of therapy. As I said in a previous email, I read the novel biographically. I see the entire work as a piece of therapy. So, at the end of Justine, I am with Darley/Durrell, and I share their feelings, or what I perceive as their feelings. If those two want to sit on their island, lotus fashion, and feel they are getting closer to the All, then I say, let them do it, and I will try and join in, although my knees are giving me problems in my old age. Bruce -----Original Message----- >From: slighcl >Sent: Jun 28, 2007 7:08 AM >To: Bruce Redwine , ilds at lists.uvic.ca >Subject: Re: [ilds] RG Justine 4 -- what to say? > >On 6/28/2007 9:27 AM, Bruce Redwine wrote: > >>Not many comments on silence at the end of Justine. Here's a good one, a practical, non-literary, non-theoretical approach. By the way, I wouldn't have advised LD to add "So that . . . " at the end. It's hard to know when to stop, which makes endings difficult. >> >> >> >> >>>-----Original Message----- >>>From: "durrell at telstra.com" >>> >>>so silence is golden in many >>>ways for it is fertile in its pluripotentiality and often catalyses an >>>inner reunion with the faint whispers of intuitive wisdom too often >>>drowned out by unnecessary mental chatter.... >>> > >I shall add my chatter against the silence and say something that I >perhaps recall Jamie hinting out in an earlier email. (I certainly have >been pointing it out in my attention to the Workpoints.) I find >precious little room for silence at the end of /Justine/. Instead, it >is all pretty frenetic. First, as Jamie has said, there is Darley's >decision not to answer Clea's letter. That "silence" actually makes a >statement and provokes thought. The withholding of an answer certainly >makes Clea and the reader of /Justine /ponder what it is all about. >Darley expects this response in what could be interpreted either as >"respect" for Clea or a passive-aggressive manipulation of her "absurd >desire" (4.3). Even if we readers pretend to some sort of enlightenment >and strike up an /Om /of appreciation we are still interpreting that >silent space. > >And then there comes the business about > > "Does not everything* depend upon our interpretation of the > silence around us? So that. . . . > >The asterisk and the ellipses incite activity and and interpretation and >noise. Those in turn are followed by a whole array of Workpoints, which >Durrell's original designation insisted had "con-sequence." This last >part--the Workpoints--is now one of my favorite parts of /Justine/. > >Finally, to give a gnostic reading, the arrival of /Balthazar /in 1958 >showed that Old D the Demiurge won out. No /silencio /here. Instead of >renouncing "chatter" we get the Interlinear, creations piled atop >creations piled atop creations. And the novelist can pay his bills and >move to the South of France. I am grateful for those real world >conditions--that they gave us the /Quartet/. /Felix culpa/. > >Has anyone asked the question, "What if Durrell had stopped here? What >if there had only ever been /Justine/?" I am imagining Durrell >withdrawing from the world and not writing after 1957. Or perhaps some >motoring accident /a la/ Scobie /p?re /in which the writer's scarf gets >caught up in the tyre. . . . How might that change our notion of >Lawrence Durrell and how would it have changed his critical reception? >How would we have interpreted that silence? > >(Sorry, Jamie. This alternative history pretty much cancels out the >appearance of the /Quintet/.) > >Charles > From michaelhaag at btinternet.com Thu Jun 28 11:33:53 2007 From: michaelhaag at btinternet.com (Michael Haag) Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 19:33:53 +0100 Subject: [ilds] RG Justine 4 -- what to say? In-Reply-To: <46827186.6080802@wfu.edu> Message-ID: <1F9D8ACA-25A6-11DC-9AD1-000393B1149C@btinternet.com> Durrell's problems in completing Justine, in particular his problem in getting up to and through the duck shoot, point to the possibility that he felt himself unable to pull off the book in the way he had hoped. Indeed I suspect he thought it was a failure. Charles, you have identified that failure. And it was the failure of Justine -- a failure to write a four-dimensional novel within one volume and to pull it off with effect -- that led Durrell to write the bogus four-dimensional quartet. Or so I suggest for discussion. :Michael On Wednesday, June 27, 2007, at 03:17 pm, slighcl wrote: > Does anyone have any observations about Part 4 of Justine? > > Once again, I find Part 4 the difficult part of the book for me to > appreciate.? Part 1 lays down the layered, necessary spirit of place > and character sketches.? Parts 2 and 3 have Balthazar's lost key, > Cohen's death, Scobie, the mysterious figure shadowed on the frosted > glass, the Summer Palace at Abousir, Nessim's "great cycle of > historical dreams," and the Duck Shoot.? All of those moments are > inescapable for me.? But Part 4 fails to engage my interest.? In Part > 4 Darley has lost most of his important "reflectors"--the other > characters through which he realizes his story. > > Perhaps there is a pattern here?? A bit of a problem with closure, a > prospect which might very well not be in tune with Durrell's evolving > project in the Quartet.? 4 & 4:? Dissatisfaction with the fourth part > of Justine gives me a premonition of dissatisfaction with Clea.? And > there is a name common to both--Clea.? I find her letters and her > presence wearying.? > > I am happy to be convinced that I have overlooked much.? Please help. > > Charles > > -- > ********************** > Charles L. Sligh > Department of English > Wake Forest University > slighcl at wfu.edu > ********************** > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/enriched Size: 2268 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070628/0db65a9b/attachment.bin From slighcl at wfu.edu Thu Jun 28 11:34:09 2007 From: slighcl at wfu.edu (slighcl) Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 14:34:09 -0400 Subject: [ilds] RG Justine 4 -- what to say? In-Reply-To: <25631707.1183049043176.JavaMail.root@elwamui-ovcar.atl.sa.earthlink.net> References: <25631707.1183049043176.JavaMail.root@elwamui-ovcar.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <4683FF21.9060601@wfu.edu> On 6/28/2007 12:44 PM, Bruce Redwine wrote: >I disagree with Charles's interpretation of the ending to Justine and the uses or misuses, as he suggests, of silence. But the disagreement is welcomed, because it highlights two very different approaches to reading the novel. > That is a valuable and fair statement, Bruce, and speaking as the listserv moderator I really appreciate it. You know already , I think, that the reading I present of the ending of /Justine /is perhaps more like the questions I would ask of my younger readers in a seminar setting--or perhaps like the questions that they might ask of me as their teacher. But that questioning can sometimes be a valuable habit, waking us from our too easy acceptance of the text, our old familiarity. And, like so many of my interpretations, my method in reorienting /Justine /in new ways is primarily Durrellian in origin. That is, I tend to look for the kind of reading that keeps in the spirit of what the book is about. And /Justine /and the /Quartet /are, in one way, "about" taking what had become a familiar expectation or explanation of character or events and placing that old "truth" in new and surprising contexts, revealing it much changed. The sort of activity that I undertake for my own reading pleasure is of course far different. At this point in my relationship with these books, I have dropped my pursuit of chronological questions and other related little "games" that Durrell likes to play. For instance, when I say that I am more and more drawn to the Workpoints, this attraction comes less and less from the idea that these notes are experimental. Instead, my interest springs more from a Durrellian or Paterian sense of their suggestiveness, their mystery. For example: Conundrum: a peacock's eye. Kisses so amateurish they resembled an early form of printing. Places: street with arcade: awnings: silverware and doves for sale: Pursewarden fell over a basket and filled the street with apples. A basket of quail burst open in the bazaar. They did not try to escape but spread out slowly like spilt honey. Easily recaptured. Moving those assorted bits of lapidary prose into different formal arrangements, letting them glint and gleam off of each other, allows me to "croon like eunuchs over their jewels, turning them this way and that in the light order to appraise them" (1.27). Though crooning is not quite "silence," that just might be enough for me these days, especially given the fact that my time spent thinking about Durrell involves questions primarily bibliographical and editorial. I think of it as playing a musical score (the text of /Justine/) with different emphases. Perhaps it is all very decadent, but the decadence of this formalism is in tune with /Justine/. And to quote my own dear friend and /cher ma?tre/, Bill Godshalk, what is so wrong with indulgence and decadence? Who would read Durrell with a Puritanical emphasis? As Pater said, "I wish they would not call me a hedonist. It gives such a wrong impression to those who do not know Greek." (I like that. That murmuring sentence might easily be heard coming out of Da Capo's lips, I think. Uncanny.) >If I may categorize Charles, he is the respected critic (no irony here) giving a literary analysis -- logically correct in many ways. He is pointing out inconsistencies in Durrell's method. How things don't work, or how they contradict themselves. > I agree with this point. But before a less careful reader than Bruce assumes that my interest in juxtapositions and inconsistencies springs from some theoretical allegiance or training, I will state again that my method is in its origins Durrellian. These books and a few others (/Gravity's Rainbow/, /Absalom, Absalom!/, /El jard?n de senderos que se bifurcan, The Good Soldier/, /? la recherche du temps perdu/, /Studies in the History of the Renaissance/) taught me new ways of reading in my youth in such a way that by the time I became better acquainted with academic methodologies I must admit that I was a bit less whelmed by them than most. /The Alexandria Quartet /taught me more about reading than any school. Characteristically, I most often seek out the deep patterns of association and enquiry modeled within a work like /Justine /and spin out variations on those patterns. It just happens that Durrell's art is essentially temporal. Whatever his claims about time being suspended, the reader always works and lives and dreams in real time, so when an incident like Darley's visit to the prostitute's bookth occurs, we must leave ourselves open to later reconsideration and revision. Once we have reached another view of that incident, pages later in /Balthazar/, the point of the reader's experience is not, I think, to say "ha! Darley was wrong! now we know what really happened." That would be a rather unappreciative way of going about things and would give us little reason to return to the book. Instead, the point is in the trembling moment between the misunderstanding and the new understanding, in the sense of that disorienting little spot of time in which we join Darley in leaving behind the initial conjecture for the next realization. It is that sense of shifting ground that gives the /Quartet /its sense of the poetic. And if we are alert enough it also may remind us of the poetic nature of human memory. I have often wondered why the "relativity" and "heraldic" metaphors seem to capture so much attention. By nature, all good poetry seems to make things relative and heraldic, I would say. >No, I read the ending in a way Dr. Anthony Durrell suggests, that is, silence serves as a kind of therapy. As I said in a previous email, I read the novel biographically. I see the entire work as a piece of therapy. > Do you mean "therapy" for the reader, Bruce? Or for Darley? Or for both? If for Darley, would we say that the mistakenness of his understanding--the mistakenness revealed in /Balthazar/, that is--is not a primary concern? That is, instead, his writing through the experiences, correct or incorrect in understanding, is the "therapy"? In other words, that /Justine /is less about 'truth' than it is about 'experience'? Inexact terms. Please forgive. Charles -- ********************** Charles L. Sligh Department of English Wake Forest University slighcl at wfu.edu ********************** -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070628/ea2c0167/attachment.html From slighcl at wfu.edu Thu Jun 28 12:24:46 2007 From: slighcl at wfu.edu (slighcl) Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 15:24:46 -0400 Subject: [ilds] RG Justine 4 -- what to say? In-Reply-To: <4683032D.3050309@wfu.edu> References: <4683032D.3050309@wfu.edu> Message-ID: <46840AFE.3030809@wfu.edu> On 6/27/2007 8:39 PM, slighcl wrote: > I have never read a sufficient exploration of the Workpoints. > Are they as unique as I have always taken them to be? > How are the Workpoints different from the epilogues, > appendices, recipes, calendars, and remedies attached to > /Prospero's Cell/ or /Reflections on a Marine Venus/? Again, I appeal to the collective knowledge of list. Do we have any pre-1957 examples with which to compare the Workpoints? Did any other novelists work in this way? My paltry and inexact comparison is the appendix that Faulkner appended to /The Sound and the Fury/ in 1946. That appendix functions in a different way, I think. It relies much less upon Durrellian evocation than upon Faulknerian elaboration, extending the Compson stories back into their prehistories and forward to their aftermath. Still, I will mention my little fancy of an Alexandrian future for Faulkner's Caddy Compson, who was last spotted sitting next to her handsome lean German staffgeneral in "an open powerful expensive chromiumtrimmed sports car" in "a photograph in color clipped obvisouly from a slick magazine--a picture filled with luxury and money and sunlight--a Cannebiere backdrop of mountains and palms." Perhaps Justine and Caddy might have much to discuss. . . . My better suggestion for the source of the Workpoints is once again Durrell's awareness of his notebook method and his opportunistic harvesting in order to fill out his book. Sometimes opportunism adds a brilliant touch! Charles -- ********************** Charles L. Sligh Department of English Wake Forest University slighcl at wfu.edu ********************** -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070628/4c48ec16/attachment.html From bredwine1968 at earthlink.net Thu Jun 28 14:50:47 2007 From: bredwine1968 at earthlink.net (Bruce Redwine) Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 17:50:47 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [ilds] RG Justine 4 -- what to say? Message-ID: <2110654.1183067448128.JavaMail.root@elwamui-norfolk.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Faulkner's Appendix to S&F, or prologue in my edition, is close to Durrell's Workpoints, but rather than look for exact parallels, I offer Stern's Tristram Shandy, the entire novel, as a prototype. In terms of humor, randomness, and self-conscious artistry. Bruce -----Original Message----- >From: slighcl >Sent: Jun 28, 2007 3:24 PM >To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca >Cc: gifford at uvic.ca >Subject: Re: [ilds] RG Justine 4 -- what to say? > >On 6/27/2007 8:39 PM, slighcl wrote: > >> I have never read a sufficient exploration of the Workpoints. >> Are they as unique as I have always taken them to be? > >> How are the Workpoints different from the epilogues, >> appendices, recipes, calendars, and remedies attached to >> /Prospero's Cell/ or /Reflections on a Marine Venus/? > >Again, I appeal to the collective knowledge of list. Do we have any >pre-1957 examples with which to compare the Workpoints? Did any other >novelists work in this way? > >My paltry and inexact comparison is the appendix that Faulkner appended >to /The Sound and the Fury/ in 1946. That appendix functions in a >different way, I think. It relies much less upon Durrellian evocation >than upon Faulknerian elaboration, extending the Compson stories back >into their prehistories and forward to their aftermath. > >Still, I will mention my little fancy of an Alexandrian future for >Faulkner's Caddy Compson, who was last spotted sitting next to her >handsome lean German staffgeneral in "an open powerful expensive >chromiumtrimmed sports car" in "a photograph in color clipped obvisouly >from a slick magazine--a picture filled with luxury and money and >sunlight--a Cannebiere backdrop of mountains and palms." Perhaps >Justine and Caddy might have much to discuss. . . . > >My better suggestion for the source of the Workpoints is once again >Durrell's awareness of his notebook method and his opportunistic >harvesting in order to fill out his book. Sometimes opportunism adds a >brilliant touch! > >Charles > From slighcl at wfu.edu Thu Jun 28 15:01:10 2007 From: slighcl at wfu.edu (slighcl) Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 18:01:10 -0400 Subject: [ilds] RG Justine 4 -- what to say? In-Reply-To: <2110654.1183067448128.JavaMail.root@elwamui-norfolk.atl.sa.earthlink.net> References: <2110654.1183067448128.JavaMail.root@elwamui-norfolk.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <46842FA6.7080709@wfu.edu> On 6/28/2007 5:50 PM, Bruce Redwine wrote: >Faulkner's Appendix to S&F, or prologue in my edition, is close to Durrell's Workpoints, but rather than look for exact parallels, I offer Stern's Tristram Shandy, the entire novel, as a prototype. In terms of humor, randomness, and self-conscious artistry. > That just might touch upon some of the "special effects," Bruce, such as the asterisk directing the reader of /Justine /to a Blank Page. (We recall the marbled and black pages in /TS/.) Any others? C&c. -- ********************** Charles L. Sligh Department of English Wake Forest University slighcl at wfu.edu ********************** -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070628/d8979952/attachment.html From michaelhaag at btinternet.com Thu Jun 28 15:19:50 2007 From: michaelhaag at btinternet.com (Michael Haag) Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 23:19:50 +0100 Subject: [ilds] Freud suggests In-Reply-To: <006501c7b883$c9196620$58f44955@lacan> Message-ID: Plato was something of a fraud too, was he not? :Michael On Wednesday, June 27, 2007, at 07:24 am, Beatrice Skordili wrote: > A recent issue of the Scientific American (2006)suggests that modern > developments in neuroscience justify by and large Freud's > metapsychology. I > am between houses right now, but I will get the reference in a couple > of > days for those who might like to go beyond ... well, facile doxa. > > Beatrice > > > "Freud wasn't always wrong. He was just mainly a fraud." > > Bruce > > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > From bredwine1968 at earthlink.net Thu Jun 28 16:49:47 2007 From: bredwine1968 at earthlink.net (Bruce Redwine) Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 16:49:47 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [ilds] Freud suggests Message-ID: <441286.1183074588031.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hound.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Probably. But he knew about irony, and Freud was dead serious. Which made him the worst kind of fraud. Bruce -----Original Message----- >From: Michael Haag >Sent: Jun 28, 2007 3:19 PM >To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca >Subject: Re: [ilds] Freud suggests > >Plato was something of a fraud too, was he not? > >:Michael > > >On Wednesday, June 27, 2007, at 07:24 am, Beatrice Skordili wrote: > >> A recent issue of the Scientific American (2006)suggests that modern >> developments in neuroscience justify by and large Freud's >> metapsychology. I >> am between houses right now, but I will get the reference in a couple >> of >> days for those who might like to go beyond ... well, facile doxa. >> >> Beatrice >> >> >> "Freud wasn't always wrong. He was just mainly a fraud." >> >> Bruce >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> ILDS mailing list >> ILDS at lists.uvic.ca >> https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds >> > >_______________________________________________ >ILDS mailing list >ILDS at lists.uvic.ca >https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds From michaelhaag at btinternet.com Thu Jun 28 17:39:22 2007 From: michaelhaag at btinternet.com (Michael Haag) Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 01:39:22 +0100 Subject: [ilds] Freud suggests In-Reply-To: <441286.1183074588031.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hound.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <2E29F75D-25D9-11DC-9E93-000393B1149C@btinternet.com> But Freud was funny. All those dreams about candles and candlesticks, carrots and bagels, usw. :Michael On Friday, June 29, 2007, at 12:49 am, Bruce Redwine wrote: > Probably. But he knew about irony, and Freud was dead serious. Which > made him the worst kind of fraud. > > Bruce > > -----Original Message----- >> From: Michael Haag >> Sent: Jun 28, 2007 3:19 PM >> To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca >> Subject: Re: [ilds] Freud suggests >> >> Plato was something of a fraud too, was he not? >> >> :Michael >> >> >> On Wednesday, June 27, 2007, at 07:24 am, Beatrice Skordili wrote: >> >>> A recent issue of the Scientific American (2006)suggests that modern >>> developments in neuroscience justify by and large Freud's >>> metapsychology. I >>> am between houses right now, but I will get the reference in a couple >>> of >>> days for those who might like to go beyond ... well, facile doxa. >>> >>> Beatrice >>> >>> >>> "Freud wasn't always wrong. He was just mainly a fraud." >>> >>> Bruce >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> ILDS mailing list >>> ILDS at lists.uvic.ca >>> https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> ILDS mailing list >> ILDS at lists.uvic.ca >> https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > From michaelhaag at btinternet.com Fri Jun 29 14:15:12 2007 From: michaelhaag at btinternet.com (Michael Haag) Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 22:15:12 +0100 Subject: [ilds] RG Justine 4 -- what to say? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > No 'so that ...' in the Cardinal edition. :Michael > > I can't find the CARDINAL edition at the moment, but I believe it has > the > "So that..." but not the endnote to the blank page. Perhaps someone > with it > ready to hand can check that. > > > Best, > James > > > From bredwine1968 at earthlink.net Fri Jun 29 15:12:11 2007 From: bredwine1968 at earthlink.net (Bruce Redwine) Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 15:12:11 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [ilds] RG Justine 4 -- what to say? Message-ID: <6285066.1183155131569.JavaMail.root@elwamui-polski.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Does "cardinal edition" refer to the Faber and Faber omnibus edition of 1962? That edition does have a concluding "So that . . . " on p. 195, and the asterisk for "everything" does refer to "Notes in the Text" on p. 203, which in turn refers to a blank page (p. 196), a la Tristram Shandy. I still wish Durrell hadn't added "So that . . . " Bruce -----Original Message----- >From: Michael Haag >Sent: Jun 29, 2007 2:15 PM >To: gifford at uvic.ca, ilds at lists.uvic.ca >Subject: Re: [ilds] RG Justine 4 -- what to say? > >> > >No 'so that ...' in the Cardinal edition. > >:Michael > >> >> I can't find the CARDINAL edition at the moment, but I believe it has >> the >> "So that..." but not the endnote to the blank page. Perhaps someone >> with it >> ready to hand can check that. >> >> >> Best, >> James >> >> >> > >_______________________________________________ >ILDS mailing list >ILDS at lists.uvic.ca >https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds From michaelhaag at btinternet.com Fri Jun 29 16:30:19 2007 From: michaelhaag at btinternet.com (Michael Haag) Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 00:30:19 +0100 Subject: [ilds] RG Justine 4 -- what to say? In-Reply-To: <6285066.1183155131569.JavaMail.root@elwamui-polski.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: The Cardinal edition of Justine was the original US paperback edition, printed February 1961. Cardinal was an imprint of Pocket Books. 50 cents. :Michael On Friday, June 29, 2007, at 11:12 pm, Bruce Redwine wrote: > Does "cardinal edition" refer to the Faber and Faber omnibus edition > of 1962? That edition does have a concluding "So that . . . " on p. > 195, and the asterisk for "everything" does refer to "Notes in the > Text" on p. 203, which in turn refers to a blank page (p. 196), a la > Tristram Shandy. > > I still wish Durrell hadn't added "So that . . . " > > Bruce > > -----Original Message----- >> From: Michael Haag >> Sent: Jun 29, 2007 2:15 PM >> To: gifford at uvic.ca, ilds at lists.uvic.ca >> Subject: Re: [ilds] RG Justine 4 -- what to say? >> >>> >> >> No 'so that ...' in the Cardinal edition. >> >> :Michael >> >>> >>> I can't find the CARDINAL edition at the moment, but I believe it has >>> the >>> "So that..." but not the endnote to the blank page. Perhaps someone >>> with it >>> ready to hand can check that. >>> >>> >>> Best, >>> James >>> >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> ILDS mailing list >> ILDS at lists.uvic.ca >> https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > From bredwine1968 at earthlink.net Fri Jun 29 16:41:47 2007 From: bredwine1968 at earthlink.net (Bruce Redwine) Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 16:41:47 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [ilds] RG Justine 4 -- what to say? Message-ID: <3965586.1183160507724.JavaMail.root@elwamui-chisos.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Ah, I stand corrected. I think I can vaguely recall the cover: a dark Justine with eyes as big as those on the prow of an Aegean ship. She's holding a cigarette, of course. A threatening pose. Interesting how the covers have evolved. They started with prints or portraits; now they're travel posters. Everything is marketing these days. Sad. Bruce -----Original Message----- >From: Michael Haag >Sent: Jun 29, 2007 4:30 PM >To: Bruce Redwine , ilds at lists.uvic.ca >Subject: Re: [ilds] RG Justine 4 -- what to say? > >The Cardinal edition of Justine was the original US paperback edition, >printed February 1961. Cardinal was an imprint of Pocket Books. 50 >cents. > >:Michael > > > >On Friday, June 29, 2007, at 11:12 pm, Bruce Redwine wrote: > >> Does "cardinal edition" refer to the Faber and Faber omnibus edition >> of 1962? That edition does have a concluding "So that . . . " on p. >> 195, and the asterisk for "everything" does refer to "Notes in the >> Text" on p. 203, which in turn refers to a blank page (p. 196), a la >> Tristram Shandy. >> >> I still wish Durrell hadn't added "So that . . . " >> >> Bruce >> >> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Michael Haag >>> Sent: Jun 29, 2007 2:15 PM >>> To: gifford at uvic.ca, ilds at lists.uvic.ca >>> Subject: Re: [ilds] RG Justine 4 -- what to say? >>> >>>> >>> >>> No 'so that ...' in the Cardinal edition. >>> >>> :Michael >>> >>>> >>>> I can't find the CARDINAL edition at the moment, but I believe it has >>>> the >>>> "So that..." but not the endnote to the blank page. Perhaps someone >>>> with it >>>> ready to hand can check that. >>>> >>>> >>>> Best, >>>> James From michaelhaag at btinternet.com Fri Jun 29 17:32:29 2007 From: michaelhaag at btinternet.com (Michael Haag) Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 01:32:29 +0100 Subject: [ilds] Cardinal Editions Message-ID: <624516C2-26A1-11DC-AC92-000393B1149C@btinternet.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 3eab_1.JPG Type: image/jpg Size: 26512 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070630/a2cad59b/attachment.jpg -------------- next part -------------- These are the 1961 Cardinal paperback editions, USA. :Michael From bredwine1968 at earthlink.net Fri Jun 29 17:52:08 2007 From: bredwine1968 at earthlink.net (Bruce Redwine) Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 17:52:08 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [ilds] Cardinal Editions Message-ID: <7503124.1183164728606.JavaMail.root@elwamui-cypress.atl.sa.earthlink.net> And wrong again. I was thinking of the Dutton paperbacks. The cardinals look like Hollywood posters. Bruce -----Original Message----- >From: Michael Haag >Sent: Jun 29, 2007 5:32 PM >To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca >Subject: [ilds] Cardinal Editions > From michaelhaag at btinternet.com Fri Jun 29 18:04:41 2007 From: michaelhaag at btinternet.com (Michael Haag) Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 02:04:41 +0100 Subject: [ilds] Cardinal Editions In-Reply-To: <7503124.1183164728606.JavaMail.root@elwamui-cypress.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: Now you know why Charles thinks Clea is 'privileged'. He likes the one without the nose. :Michael On Saturday, June 30, 2007, at 01:52 am, Bruce Redwine wrote: > And wrong again. I was thinking of the Dutton paperbacks. The > cardinals look like Hollywood posters. > > Bruce > > -----Original Message----- >> From: Michael Haag >> Sent: Jun 29, 2007 5:32 PM >> To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca >> Subject: [ilds] Cardinal Editions >> > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > From bredwine1968 at earthlink.net Fri Jun 29 20:51:00 2007 From: bredwine1968 at earthlink.net (Bruce Redwine) Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 20:51:00 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [ilds] Cardinal Editions Message-ID: <10999841.1183175460272.JavaMail.root@elwamui-lapwing.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Thanks for the Cardinal photos, Michael. You're a treasure house. I'm wondering about the "illustrated" Lawrence Durrell. Anyone have any theories about the covers of Durrell's oeuvre and their development? My favorites are the David Gentleman scenes for the Quartet and Quintet, but they're head and shoulders above the pop-culture covers and probably not representative of the "thinking" going on at the various marketing departments in publishing houses. Do the current, in-print illustrations of Durrell's dust jackets indicate that he's been reduced to travel-poster art? And accordingly, that's his status as a writer? Michael mentioned earlier, I believe, that the Quartet now has the Pyramids on its cover. That must mean something. Bruce -----Original Message----- >From: Michael Haag >Sent: Jun 29, 2007 5:32 PM >To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca >Subject: [ilds] Cardinal Editions > From jrraper at bellsouth.net Fri Jun 29 13:46:17 2007 From: jrraper at bellsouth.net (J. R. Raper) Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 16:46:17 -0400 Subject: [ilds] ILDS Digest, Vol 3, Issue 32 References: Message-ID: <006201c7ba8e$8ad66fe0$6101a8c0@your27e1513d96> Friends, Have the dates for the next ILDS conference (Paris?) been announced? Thanks for an update. Jack Raper ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 3:00 PM Subject: ILDS Digest, Vol 3, Issue 32 > Send ILDS mailing list submissions to > ilds at lists.uvic.ca > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > ilds-request at lists.uvic.ca > > You can reach the person managing the list at > ilds-owner at lists.uvic.ca > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of ILDS digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: RG Justine 4 -- what to say? (slighcl) > 2. Re: RG Justine 4 -- what to say? (Bruce Redwine) > 3. Re: RG Justine 4 -- what to say? (slighcl) > 4. Re: Freud suggests (Michael Haag) > 5. Re: Freud suggests (Bruce Redwine) > 6. Re: Freud suggests (Michael Haag) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 15:24:46 -0400 > From: slighcl > Subject: Re: [ilds] RG Justine 4 -- what to say? > To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca > Cc: gifford at uvic.ca > Message-ID: <46840AFE.3030809 at wfu.edu> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > On 6/27/2007 8:39 PM, slighcl wrote: > >> I have never read a sufficient exploration of the Workpoints. >> Are they as unique as I have always taken them to be? > >> How are the Workpoints different from the epilogues, >> appendices, recipes, calendars, and remedies attached to >> /Prospero's Cell/ or /Reflections on a Marine Venus/? > > Again, I appeal to the collective knowledge of list. Do we have any > pre-1957 examples with which to compare the Workpoints? Did any other > novelists work in this way? > > My paltry and inexact comparison is the appendix that Faulkner appended > to /The Sound and the Fury/ in 1946. That appendix functions in a > different way, I think. It relies much less upon Durrellian evocation > than upon Faulknerian elaboration, extending the Compson stories back > into their prehistories and forward to their aftermath. > > Still, I will mention my little fancy of an Alexandrian future for > Faulkner's Caddy Compson, who was last spotted sitting next to her > handsome lean German staffgeneral in "an open powerful expensive > chromiumtrimmed sports car" in "a photograph in color clipped obvisouly > from a slick magazine--a picture filled with luxury and money and > sunlight--a Cannebiere backdrop of mountains and palms." Perhaps > Justine and Caddy might have much to discuss. . . . > > My better suggestion for the source of the Workpoints is once again > Durrell's awareness of his notebook method and his opportunistic > harvesting in order to fill out his book. Sometimes opportunism adds a > brilliant touch! > > Charles > > -- > ********************** > Charles L. Sligh > Department of English > Wake Forest University > slighcl at wfu.edu > ********************** > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070628/4c48ec16/attachment-0001.html > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 17:50:47 -0400 (EDT) > From: Bruce Redwine > Subject: Re: [ilds] RG Justine 4 -- what to say? > To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca > Message-ID: > <2110654.1183067448128.JavaMail.root at elwamui-norfolk.atl.sa.earthlink.net> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > Faulkner's Appendix to S&F, or prologue in my edition, is close to > Durrell's Workpoints, but rather than look for exact parallels, I offer > Stern's Tristram Shandy, the entire novel, as a prototype. In terms of > humor, randomness, and self-conscious artistry. > > Bruce > > -----Original Message----- >>From: slighcl >>Sent: Jun 28, 2007 3:24 PM >>To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca >>Cc: gifford at uvic.ca >>Subject: Re: [ilds] RG Justine 4 -- what to say? >> >>On 6/27/2007 8:39 PM, slighcl wrote: >> >>> I have never read a sufficient exploration of the Workpoints. >>> Are they as unique as I have always taken them to be? >> >>> How are the Workpoints different from the epilogues, >>> appendices, recipes, calendars, and remedies attached to >>> /Prospero's Cell/ or /Reflections on a Marine Venus/? >> >>Again, I appeal to the collective knowledge of list. Do we have any >>pre-1957 examples with which to compare the Workpoints? Did any other >>novelists work in this way? >> >>My paltry and inexact comparison is the appendix that Faulkner appended >>to /The Sound and the Fury/ in 1946. That appendix functions in a >>different way, I think. It relies much less upon Durrellian evocation >>than upon Faulknerian elaboration, extending the Compson stories back >>into their prehistories and forward to their aftermath. >> >>Still, I will mention my little fancy of an Alexandrian future for >>Faulkner's Caddy Compson, who was last spotted sitting next to her >>handsome lean German staffgeneral in "an open powerful expensive >>chromiumtrimmed sports car" in "a photograph in color clipped obvisouly >>from a slick magazine--a picture filled with luxury and money and >>sunlight--a Cannebiere backdrop of mountains and palms." Perhaps >>Justine and Caddy might have much to discuss. . . . >> >>My better suggestion for the source of the Workpoints is once again >>Durrell's awareness of his notebook method and his opportunistic >>harvesting in order to fill out his book. Sometimes opportunism adds a >>brilliant touch! >> >>Charles >> > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 18:01:10 -0400 > From: slighcl > Subject: Re: [ilds] RG Justine 4 -- what to say? > To: Bruce Redwine , ilds at lists.uvic.ca > Message-ID: <46842FA6.7080709 at wfu.edu> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > On 6/28/2007 5:50 PM, Bruce Redwine wrote: > >>Faulkner's Appendix to S&F, or prologue in my edition, is close to >>Durrell's Workpoints, but rather than look for exact parallels, I offer >>Stern's Tristram Shandy, the entire novel, as a prototype. In terms of >>humor, randomness, and self-conscious artistry. >> > That just might touch upon some of the "special effects," Bruce, such as > the asterisk directing the reader of /Justine /to a Blank Page. (We > recall the marbled and black pages in /TS/.) Any others? > > C&c. > > -- > ********************** > Charles L. Sligh > Department of English > Wake Forest University > slighcl at wfu.edu > ********************** > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070628/d8979952/attachment-0001.html > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 23:19:50 +0100 > From: Michael Haag > Subject: Re: [ilds] Freud suggests > To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca > Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed > > Plato was something of a fraud too, was he not? > > :Michael > > > On Wednesday, June 27, 2007, at 07:24 am, Beatrice Skordili wrote: > >> A recent issue of the Scientific American (2006)suggests that modern >> developments in neuroscience justify by and large Freud's >> metapsychology. I >> am between houses right now, but I will get the reference in a couple >> of >> days for those who might like to go beyond ... well, facile doxa. >> >> Beatrice >> >> >> "Freud wasn't always wrong. He was just mainly a fraud." >> >> Bruce >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> ILDS mailing list >> ILDS at lists.uvic.ca >> https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds >> > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 16:49:47 -0700 (GMT-07:00) > From: Bruce Redwine > Subject: Re: [ilds] Freud suggests > To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca > Message-ID: > <441286.1183074588031.JavaMail.root at elwamui-hound.atl.sa.earthlink.net> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > Probably. But he knew about irony, and Freud was dead serious. Which > made him the worst kind of fraud. > > Bruce > > -----Original Message----- >>From: Michael Haag >>Sent: Jun 28, 2007 3:19 PM >>To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca >>Subject: Re: [ilds] Freud suggests >> >>Plato was something of a fraud too, was he not? >> >>:Michael >> >> >>On Wednesday, June 27, 2007, at 07:24 am, Beatrice Skordili wrote: >> >>> A recent issue of the Scientific American (2006)suggests that modern >>> developments in neuroscience justify by and large Freud's >>> metapsychology. I >>> am between houses right now, but I will get the reference in a couple >>> of >>> days for those who might like to go beyond ... well, facile doxa. >>> >>> Beatrice >>> >>> >>> "Freud wasn't always wrong. He was just mainly a fraud." >>> >>> Bruce >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> ILDS mailing list >>> ILDS at lists.uvic.ca >>> https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds >>> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>ILDS mailing list >>ILDS at lists.uvic.ca >>https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 01:39:22 +0100 > From: Michael Haag > Subject: Re: [ilds] Freud suggests > To: Bruce Redwine , ilds at lists.uvic.ca > Message-ID: <2E29F75D-25D9-11DC-9E93-000393B1149C at btinternet.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed > > But Freud was funny. All those dreams about candles and candlesticks, > carrots and bagels, usw. > > :Michael > > > On Friday, June 29, 2007, at 12:49 am, Bruce Redwine wrote: > >> Probably. But he knew about irony, and Freud was dead serious. Which >> made him the worst kind of fraud. >> >> Bruce >> >> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Michael Haag >>> Sent: Jun 28, 2007 3:19 PM >>> To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca >>> Subject: Re: [ilds] Freud suggests >>> >>> Plato was something of a fraud too, was he not? >>> >>> :Michael >>> >>> >>> On Wednesday, June 27, 2007, at 07:24 am, Beatrice Skordili wrote: >>> >>>> A recent issue of the Scientific American (2006)suggests that modern >>>> developments in neuroscience justify by and large Freud's >>>> metapsychology. I >>>> am between houses right now, but I will get the reference in a couple >>>> of >>>> days for those who might like to go beyond ... well, facile doxa. >>>> >>>> Beatrice >>>> >>>> >>>> "Freud wasn't always wrong. He was just mainly a fraud." >>>> >>>> Bruce >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> ILDS mailing list >>>> ILDS at lists.uvic.ca >>>> https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> ILDS mailing list >>> ILDS at lists.uvic.ca >>> https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds >> >> _______________________________________________ >> ILDS mailing list >> ILDS at lists.uvic.ca >> https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds >> > > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > > End of ILDS Digest, Vol 3, Issue 32 > *********************************** > From michaelhaag at btinternet.com Fri Jun 29 18:10:47 2007 From: michaelhaag at btinternet.com (Michael Haag) Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 02:10:47 +0100 Subject: [ilds] hydroplane Message-ID: This is a hydroplane on Lake Mariut (Mareotis) after a duck shoot. :Michael -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Lake Mariut hydroplane.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 156244 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070630/269fd8e6/attachment.jpg From michaelhaag at btinternet.com Sat Jun 30 04:14:36 2007 From: michaelhaag at btinternet.com (Michael Haag) Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 12:14:36 +0100 Subject: [ilds] travel poster literature In-Reply-To: <10999841.1183175460272.JavaMail.root@elwamui-lapwing.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <15FCC39D-26FB-11DC-91F3-000393B1149C@btinternet.com> These are the Alexandria Quartet and the Avignon Quintet covers as shown on Amazon UK. As you see, the author is some chap called Durrel. I pointed out the misspelling to Faber and Curtis Brown when the proofs were done, and you will be pleased to know that they got it right on the printed product. Nobody seems to care how Amazon has it, however. The cover designs are interesting in that neither relate to the subjects of the books. The Pyramids, outside Cairo, are on the quartet set in Alexandria. Venice is on the quintet set in Avignon. This is not just tourist poster art, as Bruce suggests. This is tourist posters of places the unwashed may actually have heard of, and might go to, as opposed to such out of the way historical and cultural black holes as Alexandria and Avignon. The covers are remarkable expressions of a readiness, possibly unconscious and unaware, to play to popular ignorance; these complex and uncertain cities have been replaced by more recognisable icons. The management at Faber simply shrugs about this. My theory is that content no longer matters; the image, the icon, is all. And the image being given to Durrell is that of a 'classical' and 'period' writer. You read his books not because he is of this world, our world, the modern world, and has anything to say about it, but because of atmospheres. You read him for the dim sense of another era, its style and its smells. :Michael -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: AlexQ.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 43654 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070630/befcba63/attachment.jpg -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: AvignonQ.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 47725 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070630/befcba63/attachment-0001.jpg -------------- next part -------------- On Saturday, June 30, 2007, at 04:51 am, Bruce Redwine wrote: > Thanks for the Cardinal photos, Michael. You're a treasure house. > I'm wondering about the "illustrated" Lawrence Durrell. Anyone have > any theories about the covers of Durrell's oeuvre and their > development? My favorites are the David Gentleman scenes for the > Quartet and Quintet, but they're head and shoulders above the > pop-culture covers and probably not representative of the "thinking" > going on at the various marketing departments in publishing houses. > Do the current, in-print illustrations of Durrell's dust jackets > indicate that he's been reduced to travel-poster art? And > accordingly, that's his status as a writer? Michael mentioned > earlier, I believe, that the Quartet now has the Pyramids on its > cover. That must mean something. > > Bruce > > -----Original Message----- >> From: Michael Haag >> Sent: Jun 29, 2007 5:32 PM >> To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca >> Subject: [ilds] Cardinal Editions >> > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > From bredwine1968 at earthlink.net Sat Jun 30 08:18:21 2007 From: bredwine1968 at earthlink.net (Bruce Redwine) Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 08:18:21 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [ilds] travel poster literature Message-ID: <20657438.1183216701366.JavaMail.root@elwamui-polski.atl.sa.earthlink.net> This is all true. I have a couple of comments to add, having worked in a publishing house, albeit a legal one. These days, as we all know, publishing is "bottom-line" driven. Houses do anything to cut costs and increase profits. Quality is a secondary consideration. So it doesn't surprise me that photos are preferred over illustrations (e.g., the recent Marlowe editions of the travels books) -- they're cheaper to acquire, especially old ones, like the Giza example from the 1920s, which are probably free. The other related consideration is marketing -- catching the eye of the customer and getting him/her to buy the product. Hence the great importance of "packaging." Packages sell products, even bad products. I know of a mediocre Napa Valley wine which wasn't selling. Someone at the winery learned that women buy most of the wine and didn't like the label. The label was changed to appeal to the feminine eye, and the wine soon became a bestseller. As Michael points out, something like this is happening to the selling of Durrell's books, where the appeal is to a "dim sense of another era, its style and its smells" and accuracy or relevance be damned. Something else seems to be happening, however, and I fear what it foretells. Words can't stand alone anymore. They have to be accompanied by images. Look at The New Yorker: all of its fiction is introduced by a photo. I expect photos to start appearing comic-book fashion in the text itself. I think literature will become comic books or illustrations interspersed with captions. The format of Casesar's Vast Ghost may have been a harbinger of that trend -- only in the future words will be subsidiary to images. Bruce -----Original Message----- >From: Michael Haag >Sent: Jun 30, 2007 4:14 AM >To: Bruce Redwine , ilds at lists.uvic.ca >Subject: travel poster literature > >These are the Alexandria Quartet and the Avignon Quintet covers as >shown on Amazon UK. As you see, the author is some chap called Durrel. > I pointed out the misspelling to Faber and Curtis Brown when the >proofs were done, and you will be pleased to know that they got it >right on the printed product. Nobody seems to care how Amazon has it, >however. > >The cover designs are interesting in that neither relate to the >subjects of the books. The Pyramids, outside Cairo, are on the quartet >set in Alexandria. Venice is on the quintet set in Avignon. This is >not just tourist poster art, as Bruce suggests. This is tourist >posters of places the unwashed may actually have heard of, and might go >to, as opposed to such out of the way historical and cultural black >holes as Alexandria and Avignon. The covers are remarkable expressions >of a readiness, possibly unconscious and unaware, to play to popular >ignorance; these complex and uncertain cities have been replaced by >more recognisable icons. The management at Faber simply shrugs about >this. > >My theory is that content no longer matters; the image, the icon, is >all. And the image being given to Durrell is that of a 'classical' and >'period' writer. You read his books not because he is of this world, >our world, the modern world, and has anything to say about it, but >because of atmospheres. You read him for the dim sense of another era, >its style and its smells. > >:Michael > > From michaelhaag at btinternet.com Sat Jun 30 08:32:11 2007 From: michaelhaag at btinternet.com (Michael Haag) Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 16:32:11 +0100 Subject: [ilds] travel poster literature In-Reply-To: <20657438.1183216701366.JavaMail.root@elwamui-polski.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <125D1E99-271F-11DC-9F95-000393B1149C@btinternet.com> Maybe Faber should stick to publishing Durrell's doodles. Faber have now entered the world of graphic novels. :Michael On Saturday, June 30, 2007, at 04:18 pm, Bruce Redwine wrote: > Something else seems to be happening, however, and I fear what it > foretells. Words can't stand alone anymore. They have to be > accompanied by images. Look at The New Yorker: all of its fiction is > introduced by a photo. I expect photos to start appearing comic-book > fashion in the text itself. I think literature will become comic > books or illustrations interspersed with captions. The format of > Casesar's Vast Ghost may have been a harbinger of that trend -- only > in the future words will be subsidiary to images. From The Times January 22, 2005 City of Glass by Paul Auster A tragedy in pictures reviewed by NEEL MUKHERJEE CITY OF GLASS By Paul Auster, Paul Karasik and David Mazzucchelli Faber and Faber, ?8.99; 138pp ISBN 0 571 22633 7 The past ten years has seen an amazing efflorescence in a genre that used to be confined to the shadow areas, mostly reserved for anoraks and nerds, of a bookshop: comic strips or, as they are now called, ?graphic novels?. Freeing itself from its early associations with superheroes, funnies, infantile readers and engineering departments, the genre has now positioned itself as the form of the future, boasting a roll-call of names of genius: Alan Moore, Art Spiegelman, Daniel Clowes, Joe Sacco, Marjane Satrapi, Chris Ware, Igor Tuveri, the contributors to the stunningly lavish McSweeney?s showcase of American graphic artists. From suburban alienation to political commentary, from reportage to existential thriller, the genre seems capable of articulating everything with an eloquence, clarity and originality for which most older genres have to struggle uphill. City of Glass comes with an added twist: it is Paul Karasik and David Mazzucchelli?s graphic adaptation of the first novella in Paul Auster?s New York Trilogy , and, as Art Spiegelman says in his introduction to this first British publication of the graphic novel, ?I couldn?t figure out why on earth anyone should bother to adapt a book into . . . another book!? Given that Auster?s novella is an unnerving, dark and playful meditation on masks and doubles, of the slippages and gaps between persons, personae and personalities, I can?t imagine anything more appropriate than this ?strange doppelganger of the original book?: the graphic novel itself and the act of creating it become re-enactments of Auster?s themes. The story is a big-dipper ride of chances, contretemps and unyielding opacities. Daniel Quinn, a writer of detective stories (featuring a private investigator called Max Work) under the nom de plume William Wilson, gets a wrong call in the middle of the night, asking him if he?s Paul Auster, the detective. Intrigued, he pretends to be Auster and meets the caller, Peter Stillman, and his wife, Virginia. Peter sketches out his astonishing history to Quinn: as a boy, he had been kept locked up in absolute darkness for nine years and abused by his father, also called Peter Stillman, a mad Columbia professor obsessed with discovering the prelapsarian language of man that would unite words to things, thereby restoring God?s language. He had used his son as the guinea pig in his experiment, but when it had failed he had set all his papers and his house on fire. The boy had been saved and sent to a hospital while the father had been judged insane and imprisoned. Now Stillman is about to be released and Virginia and Peter want Auster/Quinn to tail him so that he doesn?t try to harm his son again. Quinn spots someone whom he thinks is Stillman and follows him around Manhattan, penning down his quarry?s every movement in a notebook, and eventually has three bizarre conversations with him. Then Stillman disappears. Agonised by the thought that he may have failed Peter and Virginia, he sets up vigil just outside their apartment. What happens after that defies belief and resists summarisation: it is nothing short of a comprehensive erosion of the self, a vortex of possibilities, mysteries, questions coming to centre on Quinn himself. Karasik and Mazzucchelli?s book is a metaphysical thriller as taut as a drawn bowstring. It is also a viscerally moving tragedy of fathers and sons. They have shed the dead wood of Auster?s pseudo-Beckettian excesses, dispelling the slight air of pretentiousness and self-importance that stubbornly hovers around his work, and created a tight, echoing, monochrome symphony of loss and loneliness. For all its delicious allusions to Chandler, film noir, early American cartoon strips, even D?rer and Brueghel, the brooding presence behind the work is that of the Polish artist Andrzej Klimowski. The economy of the illustrations is astonishing, too: in just one panel, they succeed to devastating effect in conveying the reason behind Quinn?s taking on the search for the mad father. Or in six panels, spread out over two pages, they give us a symmetry of trauma and grief about the death of children that leaves you shaking. And almost a character in all this is Manhattan, a pared-down black-and-white landscape of austere solitude where nothing is what it seems and where Quinn?s loss of self is just a few steps away in the urban labyrinth. A work alight with beauty, compassion, love and scintillating intelligence. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/enriched Size: 6058 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070630/dfb570a7/attachment.bin From albigensian at hotmail.com Fri Jun 29 23:59:27 2007 From: albigensian at hotmail.com (Pamela Francis) Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 01:59:27 -0500 Subject: [ilds] ILDS Digest, Vol 3, Issue 32 In-Reply-To: <006201c7ba8e$8ad66fe0$6101a8c0@your27e1513d96> Message-ID: The dates and agenda will be announced very soon--we're waiting on our reps from Paris--yes, Paris, to return. see you there!! Pamela Francis >From: "J. R. Raper" >Reply-To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca >To: >Subject: Re: [ilds] ILDS Digest, Vol 3, Issue 32 >Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 16:46:17 -0400 > >Friends, >Have the dates for the next ILDS conference (Paris?) been announced? >Thanks for an update. >Jack Raper > >----- Original Message ----- >From: >To: >Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 3:00 PM >Subject: ILDS Digest, Vol 3, Issue 32 > > > > Send ILDS mailing list submissions to > > ilds at lists.uvic.ca > > > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > > ilds-request at lists.uvic.ca > > > > You can reach the person managing the list at > > ilds-owner at lists.uvic.ca > > > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > > than "Re: Contents of ILDS digest..." > > > > > > Today's Topics: > > > > 1. Re: RG Justine 4 -- what to say? (slighcl) > > 2. Re: RG Justine 4 -- what to say? (Bruce Redwine) > > 3. Re: RG Justine 4 -- what to say? (slighcl) > > 4. Re: Freud suggests (Michael Haag) > > 5. Re: Freud suggests (Bruce Redwine) > > 6. Re: Freud suggests (Michael Haag) > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > Message: 1 > > Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 15:24:46 -0400 > > From: slighcl > > Subject: Re: [ilds] RG Justine 4 -- what to say? > > To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca > > Cc: gifford at uvic.ca > > Message-ID: <46840AFE.3030809 at wfu.edu> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > > > On 6/27/2007 8:39 PM, slighcl wrote: > > > >> I have never read a sufficient exploration of the Workpoints. > >> Are they as unique as I have always taken them to be? > > > >> How are the Workpoints different from the epilogues, > >> appendices, recipes, calendars, and remedies attached to > >> /Prospero's Cell/ or /Reflections on a Marine Venus/? > > > > Again, I appeal to the collective knowledge of list. Do we have any > > pre-1957 examples with which to compare the Workpoints? Did any other > > novelists work in this way? > > > > My paltry and inexact comparison is the appendix that Faulkner appended > > to /The Sound and the Fury/ in 1946. That appendix functions in a > > different way, I think. It relies much less upon Durrellian evocation > > than upon Faulknerian elaboration, extending the Compson stories back > > into their prehistories and forward to their aftermath. > > > > Still, I will mention my little fancy of an Alexandrian future for > > Faulkner's Caddy Compson, who was last spotted sitting next to her > > handsome lean German staffgeneral in "an open powerful expensive > > chromiumtrimmed sports car" in "a photograph in color clipped obvisouly > > from a slick magazine--a picture filled with luxury and money and > > sunlight--a Cannebiere backdrop of mountains and palms." Perhaps > > Justine and Caddy might have much to discuss. . . . > > > > My better suggestion for the source of the Workpoints is once again > > Durrell's awareness of his notebook method and his opportunistic > > harvesting in order to fill out his book. Sometimes opportunism adds a > > brilliant touch! > > > > Charles > > > > -- > > ********************** > > Charles L. Sligh > > Department of English > > Wake Forest University > > slighcl at wfu.edu > > ********************** > > > > -------------- next part -------------- > > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > > URL: > > >http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070628/4c48ec16/attachment-0001.html > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > Message: 2 > > Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 17:50:47 -0400 (EDT) > > From: Bruce Redwine > > Subject: Re: [ilds] RG Justine 4 -- what to say? > > To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca > > Message-ID: > > ><2110654.1183067448128.JavaMail.root at elwamui-norfolk.atl.sa.earthlink.net> > > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > > > Faulkner's Appendix to S&F, or prologue in my edition, is close to > > Durrell's Workpoints, but rather than look for exact parallels, I offer > > Stern's Tristram Shandy, the entire novel, as a prototype. In terms of > > humor, randomness, and self-conscious artistry. > > > > Bruce > > > > -----Original Message----- > >>From: slighcl > >>Sent: Jun 28, 2007 3:24 PM > >>To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca > >>Cc: gifford at uvic.ca > >>Subject: Re: [ilds] RG Justine 4 -- what to say? > >> > >>On 6/27/2007 8:39 PM, slighcl wrote: > >> > >>> I have never read a sufficient exploration of the Workpoints. > >>> Are they as unique as I have always taken them to be? > >> > >>> How are the Workpoints different from the epilogues, > >>> appendices, recipes, calendars, and remedies attached to > >>> /Prospero's Cell/ or /Reflections on a Marine Venus/? > >> > >>Again, I appeal to the collective knowledge of list. Do we have any > >>pre-1957 examples with which to compare the Workpoints? Did any other > >>novelists work in this way? > >> > >>My paltry and inexact comparison is the appendix that Faulkner appended > >>to /The Sound and the Fury/ in 1946. That appendix functions in a > >>different way, I think. It relies much less upon Durrellian evocation > >>than upon Faulknerian elaboration, extending the Compson stories back > >>into their prehistories and forward to their aftermath. > >> > >>Still, I will mention my little fancy of an Alexandrian future for > >>Faulkner's Caddy Compson, who was last spotted sitting next to her > >>handsome lean German staffgeneral in "an open powerful expensive > >>chromiumtrimmed sports car" in "a photograph in color clipped obvisouly > >>from a slick magazine--a picture filled with luxury and money and > >>sunlight--a Cannebiere backdrop of mountains and palms." Perhaps > >>Justine and Caddy might have much to discuss. . . . > >> > >>My better suggestion for the source of the Workpoints is once again > >>Durrell's awareness of his notebook method and his opportunistic > >>harvesting in order to fill out his book. Sometimes opportunism adds a > >>brilliant touch! > >> > >>Charles > >> > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > Message: 3 > > Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 18:01:10 -0400 > > From: slighcl > > Subject: Re: [ilds] RG Justine 4 -- what to say? > > To: Bruce Redwine , ilds at lists.uvic.ca > > Message-ID: <46842FA6.7080709 at wfu.edu> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > > > On 6/28/2007 5:50 PM, Bruce Redwine wrote: > > > >>Faulkner's Appendix to S&F, or prologue in my edition, is close to > >>Durrell's Workpoints, but rather than look for exact parallels, I offer > >>Stern's Tristram Shandy, the entire novel, as a prototype. In terms of > >>humor, randomness, and self-conscious artistry. > >> > > That just might touch upon some of the "special effects," Bruce, such as > > the asterisk directing the reader of /Justine /to a Blank Page. (We > > recall the marbled and black pages in /TS/.) Any others? > > > > C&c. > > > > -- > > ********************** > > Charles L. Sligh > > Department of English > > Wake Forest University > > slighcl at wfu.edu > > ********************** > > > > -------------- next part -------------- > > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > > URL: > > >http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070628/d8979952/attachment-0001.html > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > Message: 4 > > Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 23:19:50 +0100 > > From: Michael Haag > > Subject: Re: [ilds] Freud suggests > > To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca > > Message-ID: > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed > > > > Plato was something of a fraud too, was he not? > > > > :Michael > > > > > > On Wednesday, June 27, 2007, at 07:24 am, Beatrice Skordili wrote: > > > >> A recent issue of the Scientific American (2006)suggests that modern > >> developments in neuroscience justify by and large Freud's > >> metapsychology. I > >> am between houses right now, but I will get the reference in a couple > >> of > >> days for those who might like to go beyond ... well, facile doxa. > >> > >> Beatrice > >> > >> > >> "Freud wasn't always wrong. He was just mainly a fraud." > >> > >> Bruce > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> ILDS mailing list > >> ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > >> https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > >> > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > Message: 5 > > Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 16:49:47 -0700 (GMT-07:00) > > From: Bruce Redwine > > Subject: Re: [ilds] Freud suggests > > To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca > > Message-ID: > > <441286.1183074588031.JavaMail.root at elwamui-hound.atl.sa.earthlink.net> > > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > > > Probably. But he knew about irony, and Freud was dead serious. Which > > made him the worst kind of fraud. > > > > Bruce > > > > -----Original Message----- > >>From: Michael Haag > >>Sent: Jun 28, 2007 3:19 PM > >>To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca > >>Subject: Re: [ilds] Freud suggests > >> > >>Plato was something of a fraud too, was he not? > >> > >>:Michael > >> > >> > >>On Wednesday, June 27, 2007, at 07:24 am, Beatrice Skordili wrote: > >> > >>> A recent issue of the Scientific American (2006)suggests that modern > >>> developments in neuroscience justify by and large Freud's > >>> metapsychology. I > >>> am between houses right now, but I will get the reference in a couple > >>> of > >>> days for those who might like to go beyond ... well, facile doxa. > >>> > >>> Beatrice > >>> > >>> > >>> "Freud wasn't always wrong. He was just mainly a fraud." > >>> > >>> Bruce > >>> > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> ILDS mailing list > >>> ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > >>> https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > >>> > >> > >>_______________________________________________ > >>ILDS mailing list > >>ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > >>https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > Message: 6 > > Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 01:39:22 +0100 > > From: Michael Haag > > Subject: Re: [ilds] Freud suggests > > To: Bruce Redwine , ilds at lists.uvic.ca > > Message-ID: <2E29F75D-25D9-11DC-9E93-000393B1149C at btinternet.com> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed > > > > But Freud was funny. All those dreams about candles and candlesticks, > > carrots and bagels, usw. > > > > :Michael > > > > > > On Friday, June 29, 2007, at 12:49 am, Bruce Redwine wrote: > > > >> Probably. But he knew about irony, and Freud was dead serious. Which > >> made him the worst kind of fraud. > >> > >> Bruce > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >>> From: Michael Haag > >>> Sent: Jun 28, 2007 3:19 PM > >>> To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca > >>> Subject: Re: [ilds] Freud suggests > >>> > >>> Plato was something of a fraud too, was he not? > >>> > >>> :Michael > >>> > >>> > >>> On Wednesday, June 27, 2007, at 07:24 am, Beatrice Skordili wrote: > >>> > >>>> A recent issue of the Scientific American (2006)suggests that modern > >>>> developments in neuroscience justify by and large Freud's > >>>> metapsychology. I > >>>> am between houses right now, but I will get the reference in a couple > >>>> of > >>>> days for those who might like to go beyond ... well, facile doxa. > >>>> > >>>> Beatrice > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> "Freud wasn't always wrong. He was just mainly a fraud." > >>>> > >>>> Bruce > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> ILDS mailing list > >>>> ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > >>>> https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > >>>> > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> ILDS mailing list > >>> ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > >>> https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> ILDS mailing list > >> ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > >> https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > >> > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > _______________________________________________ > > ILDS mailing list > > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > > > > > End of ILDS Digest, Vol 3, Issue 32 > > *********************************** > > > > >_______________________________________________ >ILDS mailing list >ILDS at lists.uvic.ca >https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds From richardpin at eircom.net Sat Jun 30 01:18:44 2007 From: richardpin at eircom.net (Richard Pine) Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 09:18:44 +0100 Subject: [ilds] Cardinal Editions References: Message-ID: <007701c7baef$4945cdd0$228ce9d5@rpinelaptop> The one without the nose is the virtuous Semira. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael Haag" To: "Bruce Redwine" ; Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2007 2:04 AM Subject: Re: [ilds] Cardinal Editions > Now you know why Charles thinks Clea is 'privileged'. He likes the one > without the nose. > > :Michael > > > > On Saturday, June 30, 2007, at 01:52 am, Bruce Redwine wrote: > >> And wrong again. I was thinking of the Dutton paperbacks. The >> cardinals look like Hollywood posters. >> >> Bruce >> >> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Michael Haag >>> Sent: Jun 29, 2007 5:32 PM >>> To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca >>> Subject: [ilds] Cardinal Editions >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> ILDS mailing list >> ILDS at lists.uvic.ca >> https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds >> > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > From slighcl at wfu.edu Sat Jun 30 09:00:13 2007 From: slighcl at wfu.edu (Charles Sligh) Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 12:00:13 -0400 Subject: [ilds] more wolpe In-Reply-To: <1183218828.46867c8c40b3c@squirrel.wfu.edu> References: <1183218828.46867c8c40b3c@squirrel.wfu.edu> Message-ID: <1183219213.46867e0d4596a@squirrel.wfu.edu> Here are a number of the Faber jackets that Wolpe produced during his strong period. In certain cases, the Wolpe jackets are more collectible than the books themselves. I hope you enjoy these as a designer, Marc! Charles -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Wolpe14.jpg Type: image/pjpeg Size: 130996 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070630/a4d88a56/attachment-0001.bin From michaelhaag at btinternet.com Sat Jun 30 09:06:35 2007 From: michaelhaag at btinternet.com (Michael Haag) Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 17:06:35 +0100 Subject: [ilds] more wolpe In-Reply-To: <1183219213.46867e0d4596a@squirrel.wfu.edu> Message-ID: No pictures! You expect me to READ the covers? :Michael On Saturday, June 30, 2007, at 05:00 pm, Charles Sligh wrote: > Here are a number of the Faber jackets that Wolpe produced during his > strong > period. In certain cases, the Wolpe jackets are more collectible than > the > books themselves. > > I hope you enjoy these as a designer, Marc! > > Charles_______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds From slighcl at wfu.edu Sat Jun 30 08:53:48 2007 From: slighcl at wfu.edu (Charles Sligh) Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 11:53:48 -0400 Subject: [ilds] travel poster literature Message-ID: <1183218828.46867c8c40b3c@squirrel.wfu.edu> Quoting Bruce Redwine : The > other related consideration is marketing -- catching the eye of the customer > and getting him/her to buy the product. Hence the great importance of > "packaging." Packages sell products, even bad products. But in the better situations "packaging" can be conceived in a form that recognizes and realizes something about the language and the ideas. My modest examples would be the work of Dante Gabriel Rossetti as a designer in the 1850s - 1870s and Berthold Wolpe for Faber & Faber in the mid-twentieth century. Wolpe is a particular bibliographical hero of mine. The DNB entry, which I reproduce here for scholarly purposes, makes clear how his vision of design shaped much of the British and European experience 1935 - 1989. That a designer this inescapable is not better known is simply remarkable. Bringing attention to the fact that Durrell was most fortunate to have a designer of this stature to work on the designs of his bindings and his covers is part of my larger project as an editor and a bibliographer. Enjoy! Charles **** Oxford Dictionary of National Biography Wolpe, Berthold Ludwig (1905?1989), graphic artist and typographer by Ruari McLean, rev. Wolpe, Berthold Ludwig (1905?1989), graphic artist and typographer, was born on 29 October 1905 in Offenbach am Main, Germany, the younger son and third child of Simon Wolpe, dentist, and his wife, Agathe Goldschmidt. He was educated at a technical school (Realschule), as he was good even then at metalwork (through experience in his father's dental laboratory). He was expected to become an engineer, but in 1924 he went to Offenbach Art School and began his career. He worked under the great calligrapher Rudolf Koch, whose assistant he was from 1929 to 1934. Their association is celebrated in their book Das ABC-B?chlein (1934; English edition, 1976), an elegant little collection of roman and Gothic alphabets drawn by both men. He learned goldsmith work under Theodor Wende at Pforzheim Art School and taught in both Frankfurt and Offenbach from 1930 to 1933. In 1932 Wolpe visited London and met Stanley Morison, who was interested in some bronze lettering of Wolpe's of which he had seen photographs. Morison asked Wolpe to design a printing type of capital letters in the same style for the Monotype Corporation. This was the birth of Albertus, first cut in 1934 and used in 1935, which quickly became the most widely used display face (that is, for advertising, not books) in Britain. Its apparent simplicity made it look easy to copy or reproduce photographically, and since there was no copyright in lettering it was ?stolen? by every signwriter in the country who had any taste. It appeared everywhere on buildings, shop fronts (such as Austin Reed), vans, paper bags, and posters, and if Wolpe had been paid a royalty for every time it was used (which he should have been) he would soon have become a rich man. Wolpe, who was Jewish, settled in England in 1935, and from then until 1940 worked under Ernest Ingham at the Fanfare Press in St Martin's Lane, London. While there he was designing a lower-case for Albertus, issued in 1938, a new display face, Tempest, designed for Fanfare in 1935, a range of type ornaments for Fanfare published in his A Book of Fanfare Ornaments (with an introduction by James Laver) in 1939, a new text face, Pegasus, for the Monotype Corporation (cut only in 16 point) in 1937?40, and between 1935 and 1939 a series of innovative typographic yellow book jackets, printed by Fanfare, for Gollancz. He applied for naturalization in 1936, but it was not granted until 1947, and in 1940?41 he was interned in Camp Hay, New South Wales, Australia. When Wolpe returned to Britain in 1941 he moved to the publishers Faber and Faber, in charge of jacket design, and remained there until his retirement in 1975. For Faber, Wolpe designed many books and more than 1500 jackets and covers. While working there he also taught lettering one day a week at Camberwell School of Arts and Crafts (1949?53) and at the Royal College of Art (1956?75), and, for about the last ten years of his life, he ran a unique lettering course at the City and Guilds of London School of Art. In 1966 he was invited to draw a new masthead for The Times, which was in use from 3 May 1966 to 20 September 1970. Apart from his work as a designer (which included several other typefaces, distinguished emblems and devices, and lettering for permanent and ephemeral use) Wolpe was also an author and scholar of printing history and collector of any equipment or tools connected with writing, lettering, or measuring. He was vice-president of the Printing Historical Society in 1977. Among his books was Renaissance Handwriting (1960), written jointly with Alfred Fairbank. When living in Chelsea he found on a stall next door to his house a metal instrument thought by the stallholder to be something surgical, but which Wolpe had recognized as a pair of dividers, later established to be earlier than any in the British Museum. The bulging briefcase he used for carrying work to and from home was apt to be full of newly acquired treasures. Whenever Wolpe rose to speak, for example at the Double Crown Club, of which he was an honorary member, or the Printing Historical Society, he always produced, with his diffident but entrancing smile, something wildly unexpected but totally apposite. He had a most striking head, with a big nose, which should have been drawn by Daumier or D?rer. It was in fact drawn by Charles Mozley in his little book Wolperiana: an Illustrated Guide to Berthold Wolpe, published by the Merrion Press for his friends in 1960. This book also contains one of the best photographs of him, taken outside Faber, by Frank Herrmann, who worked there. Wolpe was made a royal designer for industry in 1959 and appointed OBE in 1983. In 1981 he was Lyell reader in bibliography at Oxford University. The Society of Designer?Craftsmen made him an honorary fellow in 1984 and the Royal College of Art awarded him an honorary doctorate in 1968. He had retrospective exhibitions at the Victoria and Albert Museum (1980), the National Library of Scotland in Edinburgh (1982), and the Klingspor Museum in Offenbach (1983). In November 1941 Wolpe made a most happy marriage with a sculptor, Margaret Leslie, daughter of Leslie Howard Smith, butcher, of Lewes, Sussex. They had two sons and two daughters. Wolpe's essential Jewishness was expressed in the closeness of his relationship with his family. He died in St Thomas's Hospital, London, after a heart attack, on 5 July 1989. Ruari McLean, rev. Sources Berthold Wolpe: a retrospective survey, V&A (1980) ? The Independent (6 July 1989) ? The Times (8 July 1989) ? personal knowledge (1996) ? private information (1996) Likenesses F. Herrmann, photograph ? C. Mozley, drawing, repro. in C. Mozley, Wolperiana: an illustrated guide to Berthold Wolpe (1960) ? Oxford University Press 2004?7 *************** *************** For Wolpe online, cf. Berthold Wolpe Schriftsch?pfer, Buchgestalter, Emigrant http://www.gutenberg-museum.de/index.php?eventid_te=178&aktion=anzeige_aktuelles&pagev=1&language=e&&selection=b# Straight Jackets -- The Art of the Book Jacket http://www.library.otago.ac.nz/exhibitions/book_jackets/16/index.html Berthold Wolpe http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berthold_Wolpe -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Wolpe13.jpg Type: image/pjpeg Size: 138609 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070630/9e3cc27e/attachment.bin -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: rossetti.jpg Type: image/pjpeg Size: 38195 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070630/9e3cc27e/attachment-0001.bin -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: swinburne.jpg Type: image/pjpeg Size: 32486 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070630/9e3cc27e/attachment-0002.bin From slighcl at wfu.edu Sat Jun 30 12:30:47 2007 From: slighcl at wfu.edu (Charles Sligh) Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 15:30:47 -0400 Subject: [ilds] more wolpe Message-ID: <1183231847.4686af67e22fd@squirrel.wfu.edu> Quoting Michael Haag : > No pictures! You expect me to READ the covers? > > :Michael The script-based nature of Wolpe's best designs is indeed striking. And it immediately identifies any of those jackets and bindings as "Faber." With that in mind, I should also modify an earlier claim about Wolpe practicing the sort of design that realizes something about the book. That can be true, as in his respect for carrying out Durrell's early conception about the Faber 1st/1st_Justine_ design, with its distinctive handprint. Whether or not Wolpe's fidelity remains true for Faber 1st/1st _Balthazar_, _Mountolive_, and _Clea_ may be a matter of taste. Whatever the case, that bold handprint from _Justine_ did win out for a long time, adorning the special issue one-volume _Quartet_ and the separate individual issues of the four novels in the Faber "paper-covered" editions. In my ideal world, the handprint would return and replace the current Faber designs. But back to my point: What Wolpe's designs do most powerfully is to place Durrell's works securely within his publisher's catalog. As Michael points out with his jest, an altogether different sort of attention is required. If the reader is at all culturally literate, upon walking into the bookshop, he or she will see that a)this author "Lawrence Durrell" is a Faber author, with "Faber poet" being perhaps the most highly-esteemed designation for much of the twentieth century; and b) once the acquaintance has been made, the remainder of Durrell's novels, poetry, and travel-writing in print during the late 1950s and early 1960s are identifiable as a body of work. To put it another way, via another Faber figure, T.S. Eliot, Wolpe's designs place the "individual talent" of Lawrence Durrell into a distinct "Tradition." To take us back to the start of the conversation, this is still "branding" and "packaging," but carried out with a higher level of recognition of tradition and, at the same time, a good deal of graphic innovation via Wolpe. Those were great days. Which publishing house and what designers are working at this high level today? Charles From michaelhaag at btinternet.com Sat Jun 30 13:34:45 2007 From: michaelhaag at btinternet.com (Michael Haag) Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 21:34:45 +0100 Subject: [ilds] more wolpe In-Reply-To: <1183231847.4686af67e22fd@squirrel.wfu.edu> Message-ID: <56BAE8E0-2749-11DC-A780-000393B1149C@btinternet.com> I notice from the DNB that Wolpe also did the Gollancz covers, striking and distinctive and unforgettable, but to my mind pretty awful -- all of them yellow. :Michael On Saturday, June 30, 2007, at 08:30 pm, Charles Sligh wrote: > Quoting Michael Haag : > >> No pictures! You expect me to READ the covers? >> >> :Michael > > The script-based nature of Wolpe's best designs is indeed striking. > And it > immediately identifies any of those jackets and bindings as "Faber." > > With that in mind, I should also modify an earlier claim about Wolpe > practicing > the sort of design that realizes something about the book. That can > be true, > as in his respect for carrying out Durrell's early conception about > the Faber > 1st/1st_Justine_ design, with its distinctive handprint. Whether or > not > Wolpe's fidelity remains true for Faber 1st/1st _Balthazar_, > _Mountolive_, and > _Clea_ may be a matter of taste. Whatever the case, that bold > handprint from > _Justine_ did win out for a long time, adorning the special issue > one-volume > _Quartet_ and the separate individual issues of the four novels in the > Faber > "paper-covered" editions. In my ideal world, the handprint would > return and > replace the current Faber designs. > > But back to my point: What Wolpe's designs do most powerfully is to > place > Durrell's works securely within his publisher's catalog. As Michael > points out > with his jest, an altogether different sort of attention is required. > If the > reader is at all culturally literate, upon walking into the bookshop, > he or she > will see that a)this author "Lawrence Durrell" is a Faber author, with > "Faber > poet" being perhaps the most highly-esteemed designation for much of > the > twentieth century; and b) once the acquaintance has been made, the > remainder of > Durrell's novels, poetry, and travel-writing in print during the late > 1950s and > early 1960s are identifiable as a body of work. To put it another > way, via > another Faber figure, T.S. Eliot, Wolpe's designs place the > "individual talent" > of Lawrence Durrell into a distinct "Tradition." > > To take us back to the start of the conversation, this is still > "branding" and > "packaging," but carried out with a higher level of recognition of > tradition > and, at the same time, a good deal of graphic innovation via Wolpe. > > Those were great days. Which publishing house and what designers are > working at > this high level today? > > Charles > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > From odos.fanourios at gmail.com Sat Jun 30 13:32:06 2007 From: odos.fanourios at gmail.com (James Gifford) Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 14:32:06 -0600 Subject: [ilds] RG Justine 4 -- variant editions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Ah ha!!! This is along email, but for those who are interested in the bibliographic details, I think we need more work done and a better sense of the process involved in revisions (I suspect it would be hard to track down Durrell's correspondence about this in its entirety, across his career -- and despite the temptations, nor should the absence of a corrected copy or correspondence act as proof of its non-existence at any particular publishing house...) Michael correctly pointed out > No 'so that ...' in the Cardinal edition. To my query: >> I can't find the CARDINAL edition at the >> moment, but I believe it has the "So >> that..." but not the endnote to the blank >> page. I've just found it hiding inside the drawer under a table... In my Pocket Books edition (not for sale in the British Empire market, as per the inside cover), first published in New York in 1961 but with the 10th printing in 1969, I have the following on page 222 (_Justine_ 4.4): ---------------- .... I have decided to leave Clea's last letter unanswered. I no longer wish to coerce anyone, to make promises, to think of life in terms of compacts, resolutions, covenants. It will be up to Clea to interpret my silence according to her own needs and desires, to come to me if she has need or not, as the case may be. Does not everything depend on our interpretation of the silence around us? So that.... ---------------- There is no endnote for the everything*, so the reference to a blank page is missing, yet the "So that...." is retained, unlike the Dutton editions. This is also a distinct typesetting from the Cardinal or the Dutton/Penguin editions in the USA. YET, Beatrice's favourite Green Fingerstall is sitting there in this edition in the penultimate paragraph. Who could notice a fingerstall and not a blank page?? Charles might already know about this, but I've not traced the extent of the changes between every available impression of every edition to see what the actual editorial progression is. Charles suggested this quite some time ago for the Pocket Books editions: > The Pocket Books use the old Duttons as a copy > text, but someone "in the know" said rather hey, > by the way, LD put in X, tidied up Y & Z, but > all of that based on no systematic tracking of > the changes. "Editorial interference," call it > what you will. . . . I'm wondering about this now. I'm looking at the 10th printing from 1969, and it seems more than "someone 'in the know' said rather hey, by the way, LD put in X" -- to catch the fingerstall but not Narouz in the Workpoints (added to "Aurelia beseeching Petesuchos the crocodile god....") would seem odd in the wake of the Quartet as a whole. Moreover, to restore the "So that...," which Durrell had obviously intended by retaining it in the Faber Omnibus edition but to still cut the "everything*" reference to a blank page (also in the Omnibus), is odd. The blank page is striking and hard to miss -- it breaks the penultimate sentence; it fractures the reading experiences. So, why restore the closing fragment, alter the fingerstall in accord with the omnibus edition but still insist on cutting the reference to a blank page that is explained in _Balthazar_ and not integrate the first reference to Narouz along with the fingerstall? I can't imagine many editors careful enough to notice those things who would also not notice the emphasized "*" and Narouz, both of which are much more obviously brought to the reader's attention in the series as a whole than are the fingerstall and "So that..." from old Ezra. There's also "kneening" rather than "keening" in the Workpoint on Scobie, which isn't in any of my Dutton editions, so it would have to be a unique error the Pocket Books edition, perhaps? Yet, Michael argues: > I think it is more the case that Durrell was dealing > with Faber. The Faber editions are the definitive > editions, as Durrell wanted them. Other editions, eg > Dutton, are down to the laziness, meanness, stupidity > or whatever of the publishers concerned. Those > variants have nothing to do with Durrell. I'll go back to my first suggestion about Durrell's variants: > I think a bibliographic element is also at play, such > that Durrell is also playing around with variant > editions of each text. He knew this mattered with > Shakespeare, and he made the texts he placed inside > his own novel complete with errors (the blank page). > So, it should come as no surprise that he also > constructed variants. Dutton and Faber are our > Quartos and the omnibus is our First Folio... I know I'm skipping ahead a bit here to explain what I mean, but *why* does Pursewarden add that blank page? And, did Durrell know about the error in the Dutton edition when he commented on it in _Balthazar_? In the Faber omnibus edition on page 307: -------------- She was thinking of the famous page with the asterisk in the first volume which refers one to a page in the text which is mysteriously blank. Many people take this for a printer's error. But Pursewarden himself assured me that it was deliberate. "I refer to the reader to a blank page in order to throw him back upon his own resources?which is where every reader ultimately belongs." -------------- I know this isn't a sure thing by any stretch, and a quick look through Durrell's notebooks *might* let us know if he'd seen the Duttons before he wrote that, but I think there's still a good possibility that Durrell was well aware of the role of variants. In his UNESCO lectures on Shakespeare, he notes the 16 piracies, the variants, two types of shorthand invented to transcribe plays, and the Quartos versus the Folio for Shakespeare. Durrell also collected -- he was certainly highly aware of the role of variants, especially in the book trade and among collectors. Durrell also intended an omnibus edition of _Tunc_ & _Nunquam_ with several corrected, but Faber went ahead without him on it, and he was not pleased by this. Yes, I have a copy of the intended revisions... No, he did not make the changes in a Faber copy -- he did it in the American editions, in pen. Clearly the Faber author did think of his other publishers, and more than just a little. Moreover, I can't post the verbatim transcript of the UNESCO lectures, but I can paraphrase another significant comment from Old D in his lectures on Shakespeare: << Shakespeare did not supervise the production of the first folio, and 21 of his plays were still only in manuscript (perhaps that isn't so, but Durrell said it). Many of Shakespeare's plays were retouched versions of previous works by other authors, and only two didn't use another author's plot. In other words, Shakespeare was a great borrower, copier, imitator and collaborator. He wasn't about to invent new things, yet there's still that "special something" in the voice of a great author, something entirely unique. >> That's not exactly what Durrell said, but you get the gist... I've been faithful to his clear intentions, but it's not my text to post, and I signed the forms & all. Sigh. I still believe that through studying Durrell's awareness of, collection of, and comments on Shakespeare, we develop a stronger sense of his working method, the unique traits of his works, and a better bibliographic sense of his oeuvre. Until I'm persuaded otherwise, I assume Durrell had his hand in at least some degree of the bibliographic variations available -- it would suit his knowledge, temperament, topics, and tastes quite well. I am also aware of at least one instance of Durrell caring very much indeed about a last minute change to his American editions, in Viking, so I really don't think we can say he worked solely with Faber & didn't care about any other printings. So, how many Quartos do we have, how many are 'bad,' and is the omnibus edition our First Folio? I'm using the paper folds to denote the conceptual division in Shakespeare, so perhaps other terms would be better suited? _The Revolt of Aphrodite_ is surely a 'bad' edition of the intended omnibus, which didn't come to fruition. The Quartet is clearly 'good' in its revisions, and the Quintet is posthumous. As Paul Lorenz has repeatedly argued, "Quincunx" was Durrell's name for it, and calling it otherwise was just the publisher. I honestly don't think Durrell had the strength to revise the Quintet once he was done, for an omnibus edition that is -- but I can only imagine that it would have *needed* variants just for continuity of theme... So, where do we go from here, and what if those variants were a part of the method and Durrell's sense of textuality, the bookishness of a narrative or novel? Best, James From marcpiel at interdesign.fr Sat Jun 30 13:16:04 2007 From: marcpiel at interdesign.fr (Marc Piel) Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 22:16:04 +0200 Subject: [ilds] more wolpe In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4686BA04.2050404@interdesign.fr> If you can't read a cover what hope have you for people to read a book??? Michael Haag wrote: > No pictures! You expect me to READ the covers? > > :Michael > > > > > On Saturday, June 30, 2007, at 05:00 pm, Charles Sligh wrote: > > >>Here are a number of the Faber jackets that Wolpe produced during his >>strong >>period. In certain cases, the Wolpe jackets are more collectible than >>the >>books themselves. >> >>I hope you enjoy these as a designer, Marc! >> >>Charles_______________________________________________ >>ILDS mailing list >>ILDS at lists.uvic.ca >>https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > From odos.fanourios at gmail.com Sat Jun 30 13:43:00 2007 From: odos.fanourios at gmail.com (James Gifford) Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 14:43:00 -0600 Subject: [ilds] more wolpe In-Reply-To: <1183231847.4686af67e22fd@squirrel.wfu.edu> Message-ID: It's worth noting the degree to which Fabers kept Durrell's book in print, even using his new book covers as the covers for their catalogues whenever they had a new one, most often keeping more Durrell in print than T.S. Eliot, and featuring Durrell prominently in their seasonal catalogues. Those design details tell us a great deal about the nature of the work as well. A cheaply purchased cover image doesn't imply they don't want that book to sell less than another book. Look at the typography instead -- luscious typesetting in a big print run can cost more than resetting the whole book to fit more economically on the page... Faber reset _The Greek Islands_ in the new paperback editions (without the pictures), which would imply they *really* wanted that book to be reprinted, even though they didn't include _The Black Book_, _Tunc_, or _Nunquam_ in those new editions. Having spent several years on the retail end of the book trade as well, I can say confidently that the cover sells the book. The publisher knows that. The text and typography keep people reading, but that doesn't really matter if you've already put your money down on the table -- you're not likely to buy the same book twice, or at least not in the world of mass production. And that's why more words per page with less marginal space with an attractive cover makes good sense for an author a publisher doesn't value or support -- the covers are odd for Durrell, and I'm sure the images weren't very costly, but Faber has stood by him with decent typography and reasonably margins. That means they're still selling the whole author, not just the individual copy of the individual book. Humm... --James From michaelhaag at btinternet.com Sat Jun 30 13:44:13 2007 From: michaelhaag at btinternet.com (Michael Haag) Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 21:44:13 +0100 Subject: [ilds] Gollancz Message-ID: A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 4dnmare_cape_300.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 171829 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070630/7f0c9f46/attachment-0005.jpg -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 28m_Cattails.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 11627 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070630/7f0c9f46/attachment-0006.jpg -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: itw_1l.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 41430 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070630/7f0c9f46/attachment-0007.jpg -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: soho.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 11845 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070630/7f0c9f46/attachment-0008.jpg -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: tlb.jpg Type: application/applefile Size: 154250 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070630/7f0c9f46/attachment-0001.bin -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: tlb.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 33591 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070630/7f0c9f46/attachment-0009.jpg From marcpiel at interdesign.fr Sat Jun 30 13:53:28 2007 From: marcpiel at interdesign.fr (Marc Piel) Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 22:53:28 +0200 Subject: [ilds] more wolpe In-Reply-To: <56BAE8E0-2749-11DC-A780-000393B1149C@btinternet.com> References: <56BAE8E0-2749-11DC-A780-000393B1149C@btinternet.com> Message-ID: <4686C2C8.7060905@interdesign.fr> Some people have strong problems with yellow. Dr Freud had theories about this! Marc Michael Haag wrote: > I notice from the DNB that Wolpe also did the Gollancz covers, striking > and distinctive and unforgettable, but to my mind pretty awful -- all > of them yellow. > > :Michael > > > On Saturday, June 30, 2007, at 08:30 pm, Charles Sligh wrote: > > >>Quoting Michael Haag : >> >> >>>No pictures! You expect me to READ the covers? >>> >>>:Michael >> >>The script-based nature of Wolpe's best designs is indeed striking. >>And it >>immediately identifies any of those jackets and bindings as "Faber." >> >>With that in mind, I should also modify an earlier claim about Wolpe >>practicing >>the sort of design that realizes something about the book. That can >>be true, >>as in his respect for carrying out Durrell's early conception about >>the Faber >>1st/1st_Justine_ design, with its distinctive handprint. Whether or >>not >>Wolpe's fidelity remains true for Faber 1st/1st _Balthazar_, >>_Mountolive_, and >>_Clea_ may be a matter of taste. Whatever the case, that bold >>handprint from >>_Justine_ did win out for a long time, adorning the special issue >>one-volume >>_Quartet_ and the separate individual issues of the four novels in the >>Faber >>"paper-covered" editions. In my ideal world, the handprint would >>return and >>replace the current Faber designs. >> >>But back to my point: What Wolpe's designs do most powerfully is to >>place >>Durrell's works securely within his publisher's catalog. As Michael >>points out >>with his jest, an altogether different sort of attention is required. >>If the >>reader is at all culturally literate, upon walking into the bookshop, >>he or she >>will see that a)this author "Lawrence Durrell" is a Faber author, with >>"Faber >>poet" being perhaps the most highly-esteemed designation for much of >>the >>twentieth century; and b) once the acquaintance has been made, the >>remainder of >>Durrell's novels, poetry, and travel-writing in print during the late >>1950s and >>early 1960s are identifiable as a body of work. To put it another >>way, via >>another Faber figure, T.S. Eliot, Wolpe's designs place the >>"individual talent" >>of Lawrence Durrell into a distinct "Tradition." >> >>To take us back to the start of the conversation, this is still >>"branding" and >>"packaging," but carried out with a higher level of recognition of >>tradition >>and, at the same time, a good deal of graphic innovation via Wolpe. >> >>Those were great days. Which publishing house and what designers are >>working at >>this high level today? >> >>Charles >>_______________________________________________ >>ILDS mailing list >>ILDS at lists.uvic.ca >>https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds >> > > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > From marcpiel at interdesign.fr Sat Jun 30 13:51:38 2007 From: marcpiel at interdesign.fr (Marc Piel) Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 22:51:38 +0200 Subject: [ilds] more wolpe In-Reply-To: <1183219213.46867e0d4596a@squirrel.wfu.edu> References: <1183218828.46867c8c40b3c@squirrel.wfu.edu> <1183219213.46867e0d4596a@squirrel.wfu.edu> Message-ID: <4686C25A.30000@interdesign.fr> Hello Charles, I am a firm believer that "one should not judge a book by it's cover" Sorry! For me "design" is the conjunction between the two - book and cover. These jackets are from a period when typographical layouts were "in": the only strong point could have been "continuity" either for an author or also for a publisher, who had the reputation of having good authors, but this could also work for bad design if the authors were of good quality. The Wolpe jackets are nice typographically, relate to Faber at the time, but have nothing to do with the contents. I was seduced by Pentagram's cover for "Antrobus Complete" ( probably because of the image associated with Pentagram - such as that of a good publisher), but very disappointed in the book itself. I do have another question... why have I read posts about "great cesar's ghost" , when my Faber edition is titled "Cesar's vast ghost", book which I enjoyed. Hope I have given you a professional wiew that is understandable? Regards Marc Charles Sligh wrote: > Here are a number of the Faber jackets that Wolpe produced during his strong > period. In certain cases, the Wolpe jackets are more collectible than the > books themselves. > > I hope you enjoy these as a designer, Marc! > > Charles > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds From slighcl at wfu.edu Sat Jun 30 14:16:05 2007 From: slighcl at wfu.edu (Charles Sligh) Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 17:16:05 -0400 Subject: [ilds] RG Justine 4 -- variant editions Message-ID: <1183238165.4686c8152d780@squirrel.wfu.edu> Quoting James Gifford : > Charles might already know about this, but I've not traced the extent of the > changes between every available impression of every edition to see what the > actual editorial progression is. Granted that from a historical or bibliographical vantage every printing carries some interest. Someday we should track those US printings, as you say Jamie, and mining Durrell's exchanges with Dutton will perhaps reveal significant information. Perhaps. But for now, for my own bibliographical work on Durrell and the _Quartet_, I think my main energy is best expended primarily on tracing out Durrell's work in the notebooks and typescripts and the various Faber editions through 1962. If we found Durrell making a significant change to the _Quartet_ in the US editions before the UK editions, then I might have more reason to pursue the lead. That "if" has not occurred yet. And I have never read a letter or note indicating that Durrell was deeply troubled by sloppy US editions. I assume money in the bank mattered more to Durrell. However, that is curious about Durrell making changes for the _Revolt_ by using the American editions. While I have noticed some differences in _Revolt_ printings, I have not traced them in detail or at length. A hypothesis: Perhaps Durrell did manage to put changes into the first Duttons after the first Fabers were out and so turned there when time came to revise for the one volume _Revolt_? Or perhaps he was simply making an opportunistic move to use the books right there on his shelf, or to the editions that he did not mind trashing with notes to the publisher? Without additional evidence, I bet small change upon the latter situation. >>Charles suggested this quite some time ago > for the Pocket Books editions: > > > The Pocket Books use the old Duttons as a copy > > text, but someone "in the know" said rather hey, > > by the way, LD put in X, tidied up Y & Z, but > > all of that based on no systematic tracking of > > the changes. "Editorial interference," call it > > what you will. . . . > > I'm wondering about this now. I'm looking at the 10th printing from 1969, > and it seems more than "someone 'in the know' said rather hey, by the way, > LD put in X" -- If you want a working hypothesis for the Cardinal (cheap) editions, the design of which deeply offends my sense of the _Quartet_'s aesthetic, just assume the sloppiest, least focused editorial policies and typesetting. No question, that a lack of system might create interesting patterns, but I cannot imagine at present that they have anything to do with Durrell's directions. They have a certain historical interest, but not prime historical interest. In _Hopscotch_, Cortazar has some of his characters read Durrell's _Quartet_. Those Durrell-reading characters then have the chance to meet up with Morelli, Cortazar's Pursewarden-like novelist-in-the-novel. They actually ask him about an apparent typo which distinctly recalls LD/LP's asterisk-"trick." Morelli responds with a seemingly careless, mysterious dismissal, saying that "it is up to the reader to give the significance. Cortazar would have know about Durrell's asterisk through his own reading of Durrell and because his wife, Aurora Bern?rdez, was translating the _Quartet_ into Spanish while JC was writing _Hopscotch_. So that. . . . a few of Durrell's little games were noticed by close readers. Charles From bredwine1968 at earthlink.net Sat Jun 30 14:32:15 2007 From: bredwine1968 at earthlink.net (Bruce Redwine) Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 14:32:15 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [ilds] travel poster literature Message-ID: <3205377.1183239136023.JavaMail.root@elwamui-wigeon.atl.sa.earthlink.net> I like the simplicity of the Swinburne and Rossetti covers, but they appealed to a reading public long gone. Ask how a publisher would market such Decadents today. I suggest someone like Egon Schiele might be asked to do a cover, Beardsley being too quaint and tame. As for photographers, someone like Mapplethorp? Bruce -----Original Message----- >From: Charles Sligh >Sent: Jun 30, 2007 8:53 AM >To: Bruce Redwine , ilds at lists.uvic.ca >Cc: slighcl at wfu.edu >Subject: Re: [ilds] travel poster literature > >Quoting Bruce Redwine : > >The >> other related consideration is marketing -- catching the eye of the customer >> and getting him/her to buy the product. Hence the great importance of >> "packaging." Packages sell products, even bad products. > >But in the better situations "packaging" can be conceived in a form that >recognizes and realizes something about the language and the ideas. > >My modest examples would be the work of Dante Gabriel Rossetti as a designer in >the 1850s - 1870s and Berthold Wolpe for Faber & Faber in the mid-twentieth >century. > >Wolpe is a particular bibliographical hero of mine. The DNB entry, which I >reproduce here for scholarly purposes, makes clear how his vision of design >shaped much of the British and European experience 1935 - 1989. That a >designer this inescapable is not better known is simply remarkable. Bringing >attention to the fact that Durrell was most fortunate to have a designer of >this stature to work on the designs of his bindings and his covers is part of >my larger project as an editor and a bibliographer. > >Enjoy! Charles From michaelhaag at btinternet.com Sat Jun 30 14:36:19 2007 From: michaelhaag at btinternet.com (Michael Haag) Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 22:36:19 +0100 Subject: [ilds] more wolpe In-Reply-To: <4686C2C8.7060905@interdesign.fr> Message-ID: Perhaps Dr Anthony Durrell can tell us more about this. :Michael On Saturday, June 30, 2007, at 09:53 pm, Marc Piel wrote: > Some people have strong problems with yellow. Dr > Freud had theories about this! > Marc > > Michael Haag wrote: > >> I notice from the DNB that Wolpe also did the Gollancz covers, >> striking >> and distinctive and unforgettable, but to my mind pretty awful -- all >> of them yellow. >> >> :Michael >> >> >> On Saturday, June 30, 2007, at 08:30 pm, Charles Sligh wrote: >> >> >>> Quoting Michael Haag : >>> >>> >>>> No pictures! You expect me to READ the covers? >>>> >>>> :Michael >>> >>> The script-based nature of Wolpe's best designs is indeed striking. >>> And it >>> immediately identifies any of those jackets and bindings as "Faber." >>> >>> With that in mind, I should also modify an earlier claim about Wolpe >>> practicing >>> the sort of design that realizes something about the book. That can >>> be true, >>> as in his respect for carrying out Durrell's early conception about >>> the Faber >>> 1st/1st_Justine_ design, with its distinctive handprint. Whether or >>> not >>> Wolpe's fidelity remains true for Faber 1st/1st _Balthazar_, >>> _Mountolive_, and >>> _Clea_ may be a matter of taste. Whatever the case, that bold >>> handprint from >>> _Justine_ did win out for a long time, adorning the special issue >>> one-volume >>> _Quartet_ and the separate individual issues of the four novels in >>> the >>> Faber >>> "paper-covered" editions. In my ideal world, the handprint would >>> return and >>> replace the current Faber designs. >>> >>> But back to my point: What Wolpe's designs do most powerfully is to >>> place >>> Durrell's works securely within his publisher's catalog. As Michael >>> points out >>> with his jest, an altogether different sort of attention is required. >>> If the >>> reader is at all culturally literate, upon walking into the bookshop, >>> he or she >>> will see that a)this author "Lawrence Durrell" is a Faber author, >>> with >>> "Faber >>> poet" being perhaps the most highly-esteemed designation for much of >>> the >>> twentieth century; and b) once the acquaintance has been made, the >>> remainder of >>> Durrell's novels, poetry, and travel-writing in print during the late >>> 1950s and >>> early 1960s are identifiable as a body of work. To put it another >>> way, via >>> another Faber figure, T.S. Eliot, Wolpe's designs place the >>> "individual talent" >>> of Lawrence Durrell into a distinct "Tradition." >>> >>> To take us back to the start of the conversation, this is still >>> "branding" and >>> "packaging," but carried out with a higher level of recognition of >>> tradition >>> and, at the same time, a good deal of graphic innovation via Wolpe. >>> >>> Those were great days. Which publishing house and what designers are >>> working at >>> this high level today? >>> >>> Charles >>> _______________________________________________ >>> ILDS mailing list >>> ILDS at lists.uvic.ca >>> https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> ILDS mailing list >> ILDS at lists.uvic.ca >> https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds >> >> > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > From michaelhaag at btinternet.com Sat Jun 30 14:39:53 2007 From: michaelhaag at btinternet.com (Michael Haag) Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 22:39:53 +0100 Subject: [ilds] Vast In-Reply-To: <4686C25A.30000@interdesign.fr> Message-ID: <6FCA52B1-2752-11DC-A02E-000393B1149C@btinternet.com> It is a desperate attempt by certain academics to create a variant edition where none exists. It is Caesar's Vast Ghost, punkt. :Michael On Saturday, June 30, 2007, at 09:51 pm, Marc Piel wrote: > > > I do have another question... why have I read > posts about "great cesar's ghost" , when my Faber > edition is titled "Cesar's vast ghost", book which > I enjoyed. >> > From bredwine1968 at earthlink.net Sat Jun 30 14:37:10 2007 From: bredwine1968 at earthlink.net (Bruce Redwine) Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 14:37:10 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [ilds] hydroplane Message-ID: <9862745.1183239431063.JavaMail.root@elwamui-wigeon.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Who are the two Brits or Europeans and the Greek-looking skipper? -----Original Message----- >From: Michael Haag >Sent: Jun 29, 2007 6:10 PM >To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca >Subject: [ilds] hydroplane > >This is a hydroplane on Lake Mariut (Mareotis) after a duck shoot. > >:Michael > From michaelhaag at btinternet.com Sat Jun 30 14:42:35 2007 From: michaelhaag at btinternet.com (Michael Haag) Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 22:42:35 +0100 Subject: [ilds] hydroplane In-Reply-To: <9862745.1183239431063.JavaMail.root@elwamui-wigeon.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: Alas, I do not know who they are. But they all look like Alexandrians, and Levantines, to me. :Michael On Saturday, June 30, 2007, at 10:37 pm, Bruce Redwine wrote: > Who are the two Brits or Europeans and the Greek-looking skipper? > > -----Original Message----- >> From: Michael Haag >> Sent: Jun 29, 2007 6:10 PM >> To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca >> Subject: [ilds] hydroplane >> >> This is a hydroplane on Lake Mariut (Mareotis) after a duck shoot. >> >> :Michael >> > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > From bredwine1968 at earthlink.net Sat Jun 30 14:42:18 2007 From: bredwine1968 at earthlink.net (Bruce Redwine) Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 14:42:18 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [ilds] more wolpe Message-ID: <20877340.1183239738884.JavaMail.root@elwamui-wigeon.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Who designed Durrell's books at Faber? Not Wolpe. The typogrqphy is inspired. What is the font? Bruce -----Original Message----- >From: James Gifford >Sent: Jun 30, 2007 1:43 PM >To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca >Subject: Re: [ilds] more wolpe > >It's worth noting the degree to which Fabers kept Durrell's book in print, >even using his new book covers as the covers for their catalogues whenever >they had a new one, most often keeping more Durrell in print than T.S. >Eliot, and featuring Durrell prominently in their seasonal catalogues. > >Those design details tell us a great deal about the nature of the work as >well. A cheaply purchased cover image doesn't imply they don't want that >book to sell less than another book. Look at the typography instead -- >luscious typesetting in a big print run can cost more than resetting the >whole book to fit more economically on the page... Faber reset _The Greek >Islands_ in the new paperback editions (without the pictures), which would >imply they *really* wanted that book to be reprinted, even though they >didn't include _The Black Book_, _Tunc_, or _Nunquam_ in those new editions. > >Having spent several years on the retail end of the book trade as well, I >can say confidently that the cover sells the book. The publisher knows >that. The text and typography keep people reading, but that doesn't really >matter if you've already put your money down on the table -- you're not >likely to buy the same book twice, or at least not in the world of mass >production. And that's why more words per page with less marginal space >with an attractive cover makes good sense for an author a publisher doesn't >value or support -- the covers are odd for Durrell, and I'm sure the images >weren't very costly, but Faber has stood by him with decent typography and >reasonably margins. That means they're still selling the whole author, not >just the individual copy of the individual book. > >Humm... > >--James > > >_______________________________________________ >ILDS mailing list >ILDS at lists.uvic.ca >https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds From slighcl at wfu.edu Sat Jun 30 14:53:06 2007 From: slighcl at wfu.edu (Charles Sligh) Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 17:53:06 -0400 Subject: [ilds] more wolpe Message-ID: <1183240386.4686d0c2150e3@squirrel.wfu.edu> Quoting Bruce Redwine : > Who designed Durrell's books at Faber? Not Wolpe. The typogrqphy is > inspired. What is the font? I am not certain about you mean, Bruce. For the striking, standout Faber designs from the 1950s and early 1960s, that most certainly is Wolpe's work. Like the jackets and bindings, any "inspired" fonts would at least come across his desk for approval. I agree about the inspired fonts, and I think perhaps you heard me mystify the audience at Victoria with my enthusiasm for these minutiae. Diamond-cut endpoints! Although I have not had the same access to the Faber files that Michael has enjoyed, I will venture to guess that any issues of typography would be overseen by Wolpe. After all, by himself, Wolpe invented two or three of the most significant fonts developed in the twentieth century. He was the Master. Perhaps you could clarify your original query? Charles From michaelhaag at btinternet.com Sat Jun 30 15:05:22 2007 From: michaelhaag at btinternet.com (Michael Haag) Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 23:05:22 +0100 Subject: [ilds] RG Justine 4 -- variant editions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: This post by James confirms my point that Durrell was dealing with Faber on the Quartet and that the Faber editions are the definitive editions. Alterations were passed to Faber, that is to the relevant editor at Faber. The editor, without further ado, passed the alterations on to the printer, and the printer, with whatever degree of exactitude, effected the alterations. The American and other publishers would or would not have been informed at some point of these alterations. They may have been informed of some, though not necessarily instantly, but they may not have been informed of all. This may sound odd to some, but it is the way things were at Faber, so I had it from its director, John Bodley. He threw his hands up at the numerous possibilities for errors in the Faber editions, adding 'and God knows what happened in the American editions, not to mention the translations'. The variants James has picked up in American editions confirms this. They were receiving alterations from Faber, but what alterations and when is uncertain. And whether they chose to effect those alterations was their business. From what James says they did a very imperfect job of doing so. Indeed it is pretty clear that no competent overall editorial hand was ever devoted to the matter in America. Therefore the American editions are imperfect, they are not as Durrell wanted them (as expressed in the Faber editions), and the Faber editions are the one and only definitive editions. To claim that Durrell was creating variant editions is silly. (And by the way, as I have said before, the question is whether it was indeed Durrell at all who was making the alterations.) That Durrell later on became involved with American publishers, as with Tunc or Nunquam to some degree, and certainly over Monsieur, is a different matter. By then Durrell had gone international. He was a star. Even Faber had stopped telling him what was good for himself. I suspect that this interest in variant US editions is partly based on a North American-centric desire to give some importance (is 'privilege' the trendy word?) to local editions. But Faber was the metropolitan publisher and Durrell was not then dealing with the provinces. And of course, as I have learnt from following these postings, there are no lengths to which academics will not go to chew a bone. :Michael On Saturday, June 30, 2007, at 09:32 pm, James Gifford wrote: > Ah ha!!! This is along email, but for those who are interested in the > bibliographic details, I think we need more work done and a better > sense of > the process involved in revisions (I suspect it would be hard to track > down > Durrell's correspondence about this in its entirety, across his career > -- > and despite the temptations, nor should the absence of a corrected > copy or > correspondence act as proof of its non-existence at any particular > publishing house...) > > Michael correctly pointed out > >> No 'so that ...' in the Cardinal edition. > > To my query: > >>> I can't find the CARDINAL edition at the >>> moment, but I believe it has the "So >>> that..." but not the endnote to the blank >>> page. > > I've just found it hiding inside the drawer under a table... In my > Pocket > Books edition (not for sale in the British Empire market, as per the > inside > cover), first published in New York in 1961 but with the 10th printing > in > 1969, I have the following on page 222 (_Justine_ 4.4): > > ---------------- > .... I have decided to leave Clea's last letter unanswered. I no > longer > wish to coerce anyone, to make promises, to think of life in terms of > compacts, resolutions, covenants. It will be up to Clea to interpret > my > silence according to her own needs and desires, to come to me if she > has > need or not, as the case may be. Does not everything depend on our > interpretation of the silence around us? So that.... > ---------------- > > There is no endnote for the everything*, so the reference to a blank > page is > missing, yet the "So that...." is retained, unlike the Dutton editions. > This is also a distinct typesetting from the Cardinal or the > Dutton/Penguin > editions in the USA. > > YET, Beatrice's favourite Green Fingerstall is sitting there in this > edition > in the penultimate paragraph. Who could notice a fingerstall and not a > blank page?? > > Charles might already know about this, but I've not traced the extent > of the > changes between every available impression of every edition to see > what the > actual editorial progression is. Charles suggested this quite some > time ago > for the Pocket Books editions: > >> The Pocket Books use the old Duttons as a copy >> text, but someone "in the know" said rather hey, >> by the way, LD put in X, tidied up Y & Z, but >> all of that based on no systematic tracking of >> the changes. "Editorial interference," call it >> what you will. . . . > > I'm wondering about this now. I'm looking at the 10th printing from > 1969, > and it seems more than "someone 'in the know' said rather hey, by the > way, > LD put in X" -- to catch the fingerstall but not Narouz in the > Workpoints > (added to "Aurelia beseeching Petesuchos the crocodile god....") would > seem > odd in the wake of the Quartet as a whole. Moreover, to restore the > "So > that...," which Durrell had obviously intended by retaining it in the > Faber > Omnibus edition but to still cut the "everything*" reference to a > blank page > (also in the Omnibus), is odd. The blank page is striking and hard to > miss > -- it breaks the penultimate sentence; it fractures the reading > experiences. > So, why restore the closing fragment, alter the fingerstall in accord > with > the omnibus edition but still insist on cutting the reference to a > blank > page that is explained in _Balthazar_ and not integrate the first > reference > to Narouz along with the fingerstall? > > I can't imagine many editors careful enough to notice those things who > would > also not notice the emphasized "*" and Narouz, both of which are much > more > obviously brought to the reader's attention in the series as a whole > than > are the fingerstall and "So that..." from old Ezra. > > There's also "kneening" rather than "keening" in the Workpoint on > Scobie, > which isn't in any of my Dutton editions, so it would have to be a > unique > error the Pocket Books edition, perhaps? > > Yet, Michael argues: > >> I think it is more the case that Durrell was dealing >> with Faber. The Faber editions are the definitive >> editions, as Durrell wanted them. Other editions, eg >> Dutton, are down to the laziness, meanness, stupidity >> or whatever of the publishers concerned. Those >> variants have nothing to do with Durrell. > > I'll go back to my first suggestion about Durrell's variants: > >> I think a bibliographic element is also at play, such >> that Durrell is also playing around with variant >> editions of each text. He knew this mattered with >> Shakespeare, and he made the texts he placed inside >> his own novel complete with errors (the blank page). >> So, it should come as no surprise that he also >> constructed variants. Dutton and Faber are our >> Quartos and the omnibus is our First Folio... > > I know I'm skipping ahead a bit here to explain what I mean, but *why* > does > Pursewarden add that blank page? And, did Durrell know about the > error in > the Dutton edition when he commented on it in _Balthazar_? In the > Faber > omnibus edition on page 307: > > -------------- > She was thinking of the famous page with the asterisk in the first > volume > which refers one to a page in the text which is mysteriously blank. > Many > people take this for a printer's error. But Pursewarden himself > assured me > that it was deliberate. "I refer to the reader to a blank page in > order to > throw him back upon his own resources?which is where every reader > ultimately > belongs." > -------------- > > I know this isn't a sure thing by any stretch, and a quick look through > Durrell's notebooks *might* let us know if he'd seen the Duttons > before he > wrote that, but I think there's still a good possibility that Durrell > was > well aware of the role of variants. In his UNESCO lectures on > Shakespeare, > he notes the 16 piracies, the variants, two types of shorthand > invented to > transcribe plays, and the Quartos versus the Folio for Shakespeare. > Durrell > also collected -- he was certainly highly aware of the role of > variants, > especially in the book trade and among collectors. > > Durrell also intended an omnibus edition of _Tunc_ & _Nunquam_ with > several > corrected, but Faber went ahead without him on it, and he was not > pleased by > this. Yes, I have a copy of the intended revisions... No, he did not > make > the changes in a Faber copy -- he did it in the American editions, in > pen. > Clearly the Faber author did think of his other publishers, and more > than > just a little. > > Moreover, I can't post the verbatim transcript of the UNESCO lectures, > but I > can paraphrase another significant comment from Old D in his lectures > on > Shakespeare: > > << Shakespeare did not supervise the production of the first folio, > and 21 > of his plays were still only in manuscript (perhaps that isn't so, but > Durrell said it). Many of Shakespeare's plays were retouched versions > of > previous works by other authors, and only two didn't use another > author's > plot. In other words, Shakespeare was a great borrower, copier, > imitator > and collaborator. He wasn't about to invent new things, yet there's > still > that "special something" in the voice of a great author, something > entirely > unique. >> > > That's not exactly what Durrell said, but you get the gist... I've > been > faithful to his clear intentions, but it's not my text to post, and I > signed > the forms & all. Sigh. > > I still believe that through studying Durrell's awareness of, > collection of, > and comments on Shakespeare, we develop a stronger sense of his working > method, the unique traits of his works, and a better bibliographic > sense of > his oeuvre. Until I'm persuaded otherwise, I assume Durrell had his > hand in > at least some degree of the bibliographic variations available -- it > would > suit his knowledge, temperament, topics, and tastes quite well. I am > also > aware of at least one instance of Durrell caring very much indeed > about a > last minute change to his American editions, in Viking, so I really > don't > think we can say he worked solely with Faber & didn't care about any > other > printings. > > So, how many Quartos do we have, how many are 'bad,' and is the omnibus > edition our First Folio? I'm using the paper folds to denote the > conceptual > division in Shakespeare, so perhaps other terms would be better suited? > _The Revolt of Aphrodite_ is surely a 'bad' edition of the intended > omnibus, > which didn't come to fruition. The Quartet is clearly 'good' in its > revisions, and the Quintet is posthumous. As Paul Lorenz has > repeatedly > argued, "Quincunx" was Durrell's name for it, and calling it otherwise > was > just the publisher. I honestly don't think Durrell had the strength to > revise the Quintet once he was done, for an omnibus edition that is -- > but I > can only imagine that it would have *needed* variants just for > continuity of > theme... > > So, where do we go from here, and what if those variants were a part > of the > method and Durrell's sense of textuality, the bookishness of a > narrative or > novel? > > Best, > James > > > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > From michaelhaag at btinternet.com Sat Jun 30 15:09:08 2007 From: michaelhaag at btinternet.com (Michael Haag) Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 23:09:08 +0100 Subject: [ilds] Bitter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <865373CB-2756-11DC-A02E-000393B1149C@btinternet.com> There are certain books Faber keeps in print, and which are worth resetting to produce a cheap edition which fits into airport racks, to sell to the holiday trade. For books like Bitter Lemons the tourist trade to Cyprus is virtually the sole market. :Michael On Saturday, June 30, 2007, at 09:43 pm, James Gifford wrote: > Faber reset _The Greek > Islands_ in the new paperback editions (without the pictures), which > would > imply they *really* wanted that book to be reprinted, even though they > didn't include _The Black Book_, _Tunc_, or _Nunquam_ in those new > editions. > From michaelhaag at btinternet.com Sat Jun 30 15:14:13 2007 From: michaelhaag at btinternet.com (Michael Haag) Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 23:14:13 +0100 Subject: [ilds] Revolt In-Reply-To: <1183238165.4686c8152d780@squirrel.wfu.edu> Message-ID: <3BB5E700-2757-11DC-A02E-000393B1149C@btinternet.com> That sounds likely. :Michael On Saturday, June 30, 2007, at 10:16 pm, Charles Sligh wrote: > > > However, that is curious about Durrell making changes for the _Revolt_ > by using > the American editions. ... perhaps he was simply making an > opportunistic move to use the books right there on his shelf, or to the editions that he did not mind trashing with notes to the publisher? > > > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/enriched Size: 518 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070630/7fb2344e/attachment.bin From bredwine1968 at earthlink.net Sat Jun 30 16:36:50 2007 From: bredwine1968 at earthlink.net (Bruce Redwine) Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 16:36:50 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [ilds] Bitter Message-ID: <7418666.1183246610357.JavaMail.root@elwamui-ovcar.atl.sa.earthlink.net> I've noted over the years that Durrell's Cyprus lives on and prompts the occasional story in the New York Times about Bellapaix, Durrell's house (which has become something of landmark and tourist attraction), and the Tree of Idleness. There was also a story about Cyprus being a new haven for British retirees and their disputes over ownership of land. I attribute all that to what Durrell accomplished in Bitter Lemons. That and CVG paved the way for Peter Mayle's Year in Provence. Bruce -----Original Message----- >From: Michael Haag >Sent: Jun 30, 2007 3:09 PM >To: gifford at uvic.ca, ilds at lists.uvic.ca >Subject: [ilds] Bitter > >There are certain books Faber keeps in print, and which are worth >resetting to produce a cheap edition which fits into airport racks, to >sell to the holiday trade. For books like Bitter Lemons the tourist >trade to Cyprus is virtually the sole market. > >:Michael > > >On Saturday, June 30, 2007, at 09:43 pm, James Gifford wrote: > >> Faber reset _The Greek >> Islands_ in the new paperback editions (without the pictures), which >> would >> imply they *really* wanted that book to be reprinted, even though they >> didn't include _The Black Book_, _Tunc_, or _Nunquam_ in those new >> editions. From bredwine1968 at earthlink.net Sat Jun 30 16:53:48 2007 From: bredwine1968 at earthlink.net (Bruce Redwine) Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 16:53:48 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [ilds] more wolpe Message-ID: <1070766.1183247628737.JavaMail.root@elwamui-ovcar.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Charles, I was not mystified at Victoria and thoroughly enjoyed what you enjoyed talking about. I look forward to seeing the essay in print. A good deal of my original pleasure in reading the Dutton editions of the Quartet had to do with the book's design, in particular the font and the dust jackets -- all of which enhanced the poetic experience of Durrell's prose. (It's not really the same experience when another font is used.) That complementarity makes me think that the Quartet's designer also had a "revelation" and truly understood what Durrell was trying to do. Maybe this is Wolpe's work. The font must have a name. Bruce -----Original Message----- >>From: Charles Sligh >>Sent: Jun 30, 2007 2:53 PM >>To: Bruce Redwine , ilds at lists.uvic.ca >>Subject: Re: [ilds] more wolpe >> >>Quoting Bruce Redwine : >> >>> Who designed Durrell's books at Faber? Not Wolpe. The typogrqphy is >>> inspired. What is the font? >> >>I am not certain about you mean, Bruce. >> >>For the striking, standout Faber designs from the 1950s and early 1960s, that >>most certainly is Wolpe's work. Like the jackets and bindings, any "inspired" >>fonts would at least come across his desk for approval. I agree about the >>inspired fonts, and I think perhaps you heard me mystify the audience at >>Victoria with my enthusiasm for these minutiae. Diamond-cut endpoints! >> >>Although I have not had the same access to the Faber files that Michael has >>enjoyed, I will venture to guess that any issues of typography would be >>overseen by Wolpe. After all, by himself, Wolpe invented two or three of the >>most significant fonts developed in the twentieth century. He was the Master. >> >>Perhaps you could clarify your original query? >> >>Charles From slighcl at wfu.edu Sat Jun 30 17:06:17 2007 From: slighcl at wfu.edu (Charles Sligh) Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 20:06:17 -0400 Subject: [ilds] more wolpe Message-ID: <1183248377.4686eff970c84@squirrel.wfu.edu> Quoting Bruce Redwine : > > Charles, I was not mystified at Victoria and thoroughly enjoyed what you > enjoyed talking about. I look forward to seeing the essay in print. A good > deal of my original pleasure in reading the Dutton editions of the Quartet > had to do with the book's design, in particular the font and the dust jackets > -- all of which enhanced the poetic experience of Durrell's prose. Thanks for the assurance, Bruce. Of course I had already heard from you after the conference, so I knew that you at least shared my "gentle madness." Look for all of the news fit to print sometime soon. The early Dutton paperbacks were my also first experience of Durrell. Their printings used the same plates or photoduplicates as the early Dutton cloth volumes. I will repeat what I said in Victoria. As a very, very young reader, Kipling was the first writer to make me aware that some individual somewhere and sometime had written the stories and poems that I was holding dear. That a voice had a name. Then as a slightly older reader, say at 15, Lawrence Durrell was the first writer whose books made me pay attention to "books for book's sake"--i.e., the physical pleasure of type, paper, binding, &c. Enjoy! Charles From marcpiel at interdesign.fr Sat Jun 30 23:51:16 2007 From: marcpiel at interdesign.fr (Marc Piel) Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2007 08:51:16 +0200 Subject: [ilds] RG Justine 4 -- variant editions In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <46874EE4.2020406@interdesign.fr> It is interesting to note that John Bradley had taken a typography course, Bodley was interested in art and design: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/11/15/db1503.xml Also that in this book the subject matter is "collaboration", not stealing: http://www.cambridge.org/catalogue/catalogue.asp?isbn=9780511079443&ss=fro Michael Haag wrote: > This post by James confirms my point that Durrell was dealing with > Faber on the Quartet and that the Faber editions are the definitive > editions. > > Alterations were passed to Faber, that is to the relevant editor at > Faber. The editor, without further ado, passed the alterations on to > the printer, and the printer, with whatever degree of exactitude, > effected the alterations. The American and other publishers would or > would not have been informed at some point of these alterations. They > may have been informed of some, though not necessarily instantly, but > they may not have been informed of all. This may sound odd to some, > but it is the way things were at Faber, so I had it from its director, > John Bodley. He threw his hands up at the numerous possibilities for > errors in the Faber editions, adding 'and God knows what happened in > the American editions, not to mention the translations'. > > The variants James has picked up in American editions confirms this. > They were receiving alterations from Faber, but what alterations and > when is uncertain. And whether they chose to effect those alterations > was their business. From what James says they did a very imperfect job > of doing so. Indeed it is pretty clear that no competent overall > editorial hand was ever devoted to the matter in America. Therefore > the American editions are imperfect, they are not as Durrell wanted > them (as expressed in the Faber editions), and the Faber editions are > the one and only definitive editions. To claim that Durrell was > creating variant editions is silly. (And by the way, as I have said > before, the question is whether it was indeed Durrell at all who was > making the alterations.) > > That Durrell later on became involved with American publishers, as with > Tunc or Nunquam to some degree, and certainly over Monsieur, is a > different matter. By then Durrell had gone international. He was a > star. Even Faber had stopped telling him what was good for himself. > > I suspect that this interest in variant US editions is partly based on > a North American-centric desire to give some importance (is 'privilege' > the trendy word?) to local editions. But Faber was the metropolitan > publisher and Durrell was not then dealing with the provinces. > > And of course, as I have learnt from following these postings, there > are no lengths to which academics will not go to chew a bone. > > :Michael > > > > > On Saturday, June 30, 2007, at 09:32 pm, James Gifford wrote: > > >>Ah ha!!! This is along email, but for those who are interested in the >>bibliographic details, I think we need more work done and a better >>sense of >>the process involved in revisions (I suspect it would be hard to track >>down >>Durrell's correspondence about this in its entirety, across his career >>-- >>and despite the temptations, nor should the absence of a corrected >>copy or >>correspondence act as proof of its non-existence at any particular >>publishing house...) >> >>Michael correctly pointed out >> >> >>>No 'so that ...' in the Cardinal edition. >> >>To my query: >> >> >>>>I can't find the CARDINAL edition at the >>>>moment, but I believe it has the "So >>>>that..." but not the endnote to the blank >>>>page. >> >>I've just found it hiding inside the drawer under a table... In my >>Pocket >>Books edition (not for sale in the British Empire market, as per the >>inside >>cover), first published in New York in 1961 but with the 10th printing >>in >>1969, I have the following on page 222 (_Justine_ 4.4): >> >>---------------- >>.... I have decided to leave Clea's last letter unanswered. I no >>longer >>wish to coerce anyone, to make promises, to think of life in terms of >>compacts, resolutions, covenants. It will be up to Clea to interpret >>my >>silence according to her own needs and desires, to come to me if she >>has >>need or not, as the case may be. Does not everything depend on our >>interpretation of the silence around us? So that.... >>---------------- >> >>There is no endnote for the everything*, so the reference to a blank >>page is >>missing, yet the "So that...." is retained, unlike the Dutton editions. >>This is also a distinct typesetting from the Cardinal or the >>Dutton/Penguin >>editions in the USA. >> >>YET, Beatrice's favourite Green Fingerstall is sitting there in this >>edition >>in the penultimate paragraph. Who could notice a fingerstall and not a >>blank page?? >> >>Charles might already know about this, but I've not traced the extent >>of the >>changes between every available impression of every edition to see >>what the >>actual editorial progression is. Charles suggested this quite some >>time ago >>for the Pocket Books editions: >> >> >>>The Pocket Books use the old Duttons as a copy >>>text, but someone "in the know" said rather hey, >>>by the way, LD put in X, tidied up Y & Z, but >>>all of that based on no systematic tracking of >>>the changes. "Editorial interference," call it >>>what you will. . . . >> >>I'm wondering about this now. I'm looking at the 10th printing from >>1969, >>and it seems more than "someone 'in the know' said rather hey, by the >>way, >>LD put in X" -- to catch the fingerstall but not Narouz in the >>Workpoints >>(added to "Aurelia beseeching Petesuchos the crocodile god....") would >>seem >>odd in the wake of the Quartet as a whole. Moreover, to restore the >>"So >>that...," which Durrell had obviously intended by retaining it in the >>Faber >>Omnibus edition but to still cut the "everything*" reference to a >>blank page >>(also in the Omnibus), is odd. The blank page is striking and hard to >>miss >>-- it breaks the penultimate sentence; it fractures the reading >>experiences. >>So, why restore the closing fragment, alter the fingerstall in accord >>with >>the omnibus edition but still insist on cutting the reference to a >>blank >>page that is explained in _Balthazar_ and not integrate the first >>reference >>to Narouz along with the fingerstall? >> >>I can't imagine many editors careful enough to notice those things who >>would >>also not notice the emphasized "*" and Narouz, both of which are much >>more >>obviously brought to the reader's attention in the series as a whole >>than >>are the fingerstall and "So that..." from old Ezra. >> >>There's also "kneening" rather than "keening" in the Workpoint on >>Scobie, >>which isn't in any of my Dutton editions, so it would have to be a >>unique >>error the Pocket Books edition, perhaps? >> >>Yet, Michael argues: >> >> >>>I think it is more the case that Durrell was dealing >>>with Faber. The Faber editions are the definitive >>>editions, as Durrell wanted them. Other editions, eg >>>Dutton, are down to the laziness, meanness, stupidity >>>or whatever of the publishers concerned. Those >>>variants have nothing to do with Durrell. >> >>I'll go back to my first suggestion about Durrell's variants: >> >> >>>I think a bibliographic element is also at play, such >>>that Durrell is also playing around with variant >>>editions of each text. He knew this mattered with >>>Shakespeare, and he made the texts he placed inside >>>his own novel complete with errors (the blank page). >>>So, it should come as no surprise that he also >>>constructed variants. Dutton and Faber are our >>>Quartos and the omnibus is our First Folio... >> >>I know I'm skipping ahead a bit here to explain what I mean, but *why* >>does >>Pursewarden add that blank page? And, did Durrell know about the >>error in >>the Dutton edition when he commented on it in _Balthazar_? In the >>Faber >>omnibus edition on page 307: >> >>-------------- >>She was thinking of the famous page with the asterisk in the first >>volume >>which refers one to a page in the text which is mysteriously blank. >>Many >>people take this for a printer's error. But Pursewarden himself >>assured me >>that it was deliberate. "I refer to the reader to a blank page in >>order to >>throw him back upon his own resources?which is where every reader >>ultimately >>belongs." >>-------------- >> >>I know this isn't a sure thing by any stretch, and a quick look through >>Durrell's notebooks *might* let us know if he'd seen the Duttons >>before he >>wrote that, but I think there's still a good possibility that Durrell >>was >>well aware of the role of variants. In his UNESCO lectures on >>Shakespeare, >>he notes the 16 piracies, the variants, two types of shorthand >>invented to >>transcribe plays, and the Quartos versus the Folio for Shakespeare. >>Durrell >>also collected -- he was certainly highly aware of the role of >>variants, >>especially in the book trade and among collectors. >> >>Durrell also intended an omnibus edition of _Tunc_ & _Nunquam_ with >>several >>corrected, but Faber went ahead without him on it, and he was not >>pleased by >>this. Yes, I have a copy of the intended revisions... No, he did not >>make >>the changes in a Faber copy -- he did it in the American editions, in >>pen. >>Clearly the Faber author did think of his other publishers, and more >>than >>just a little. >> >>Moreover, I can't post the verbatim transcript of the UNESCO lectures, >>but I >>can paraphrase another significant comment from Old D in his lectures >>on >>Shakespeare: >> >><< Shakespeare did not supervise the production of the first folio, >>and 21 >>of his plays were still only in manuscript (perhaps that isn't so, but >>Durrell said it). Many of Shakespeare's plays were retouched versions >>of >>previous works by other authors, and only two didn't use another >>author's >>plot. In other words, Shakespeare was a great borrower, copier, >>imitator >>and collaborator. He wasn't about to invent new things, yet there's >>still >>that "special something" in the voice of a great author, something >>entirely >>unique. >> >> >>That's not exactly what Durrell said, but you get the gist... I've >>been >>faithful to his clear intentions, but it's not my text to post, and I >>signed >>the forms & all. Sigh. >> >>I still believe that through studying Durrell's awareness of, >>collection of, >>and comments on Shakespeare, we develop a stronger sense of his working >>method, the unique traits of his works, and a better bibliographic >>sense of >>his oeuvre. Until I'm persuaded otherwise, I assume Durrell had his >>hand in >>at least some degree of the bibliographic variations available -- it >>would >>suit his knowledge, temperament, topics, and tastes quite well. I am >>also >>aware of at least one instance of Durrell caring very much indeed >>about a >>last minute change to his American editions, in Viking, so I really >>don't >>think we can say he worked solely with Faber & didn't care about any >>other >>printings. >> >>So, how many Quartos do we have, how many are 'bad,' and is the omnibus >>edition our First Folio? I'm using the paper folds to denote the >>conceptual >>division in Shakespeare, so perhaps other terms would be better suited? >>_The Revolt of Aphrodite_ is surely a 'bad' edition of the intended >>omnibus, >>which didn't come to fruition. The Quartet is clearly 'good' in its >>revisions, and the Quintet is posthumous. As Paul Lorenz has >>repeatedly >>argued, "Quincunx" was Durrell's name for it, and calling it otherwise >>was >>just the publisher. I honestly don't think Durrell had the strength to >>revise the Quintet once he was done, for an omnibus edition that is -- >>but I >>can only imagine that it would have *needed* variants just for >>continuity of >>theme... >> >>So, where do we go from here, and what if those variants were a part >>of the >>method and Durrell's sense of textuality, the bookishness of a >>narrative or >>novel? >> >>Best, >>James >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>ILDS mailing list >>ILDS at lists.uvic.ca >>https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > From Smithchamberlin at aol.com Sun Jul 1 06:46:49 2007 From: Smithchamberlin at aol.com (Smithchamberlin at aol.com) Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2007 09:46:49 EDT Subject: [ilds] Photographic images Message-ID: I am not receiving any of the photographic images being sent (mainly by Michael). Have I offended someone? Brewster ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070701/44df319e/attachment.html From bredwine1968 at earthlink.net Sun Jul 1 11:42:54 2007 From: bredwine1968 at earthlink.net (Bruce Redwine) Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2007 11:42:54 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [ilds] Justine's parts Message-ID: <28552092.1183315374823.JavaMail.root@elwamui-ovcar.atl.sa.earthlink.net> So, the silence says all, and I conclude that Justine's parts remains parts and not a whole, and no one is willing to try and put her back together again? She's just a broken watch with a lost key. That's what Durrell intended? Bruce From odos.fanourios at gmail.com Sun Jul 1 11:46:05 2007 From: odos.fanourios at gmail.com (James Gifford) Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2007 12:46:05 -0600 Subject: [ilds] Photographic images In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi Brewster, For any of you who received the daily digest collection of all the messages in one email, you will only be able to access the attached images through links in the digest ? if you?re really stuck, go to the archives and grab the images from the links there. For instance: https://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/Week-of-Mon-20070625/001988.html Cheers, James ps: if you send messages in HTML format (e.g., with a nice font), they will also appear as attachments for some list members as well as in the digest and in the archives. On 7/1/07 7:46 AM, "Smithchamberlin at aol.com" wrote: > I am not receiving any of the photographic images being sent (mainly by > Michael). Have I offended someone? > Brewster From odos.fanourios at gmail.com Sun Jul 1 11:47:26 2007 From: odos.fanourios at gmail.com (James Gifford) Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2007 12:47:26 -0600 Subject: [ilds] Bitter In-Reply-To: <7418666.1183246610357.JavaMail.root@elwamui-ovcar.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: > For books like Bitter Lemons the tourist > trade to Cyprus is virtually the sole market. Odd -- I've only seen it on the shelf in bookstores in Canadian malls (where we only get the Faber editions), plus a handful of used bookstores... I also don't think I'd use Bitter Lemons to market Cyprus as a tourist destination in quite the same was as _Prospero's Cell_ works for Corfu or _Reflections on a Marine Venus_ for Rhodes. James From odos.fanourios at gmail.com Sun Jul 1 12:46:03 2007 From: odos.fanourios at gmail.com (James Gifford) Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2007 13:46:03 -0600 Subject: [ilds] Vast In-Reply-To: <6FCA52B1-2752-11DC-A02E-000393B1149C@btinternet.com> Message-ID: I just searched the archives and can't find a single instance "Great Caesar's Ghost" or a variation of those words as a title with different spellings. Michael, have you just created a variant edition of the listserv messages? Grins, James On 6/30/07 3:39 PM, "Michael Haag" wrote: > It is a desperate attempt by certain academics to create a variant > edition where none exists. It is Caesar's Vast Ghost, punkt. > > :Michael > > >> On Saturday, June 30, 2007, at 09:51 pm, Marc Piel wrote: >> >> >> I do have another question... why have I read >> posts about "great cesar's ghost" , when my Faber >> edition is titled "Cesar's vast ghost", book which >> I enjoyed. From michaelhaag at btinternet.com Sun Jul 1 12:54:39 2007 From: michaelhaag at btinternet.com (Michael Haag) Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2007 20:54:39 +0100 Subject: [ilds] Bitter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: The Cypriots do not have much else to market. :Michael On Sunday, July 1, 2007, at 07:47 pm, James Gifford wrote: >> For books like Bitter Lemons the tourist >> trade to Cyprus is virtually the sole market. > > Odd -- I've only seen it on the shelf in bookstores in Canadian malls > (where > we only get the Faber editions), plus a handful of used bookstores... > I > also don't think I'd use Bitter Lemons to market Cyprus as a tourist > destination in quite the same was as _Prospero's Cell_ works for Corfu > or > _Reflections on a Marine Venus_ for Rhodes. > > James > > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > From michaelhaag at btinternet.com Sun Jul 1 12:55:22 2007 From: michaelhaag at btinternet.com (Michael Haag) Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2007 20:55:22 +0100 Subject: [ilds] Vast In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <00B51E61-280D-11DC-8B9A-000393B1149C@btinternet.com> I am doing my best to proliferate the tradition! :Michael On Sunday, July 1, 2007, at 08:46 pm, James Gifford wrote: > I just searched the archives and can't find a single instance "Great > Caesar's Ghost" or a variation of those words as a title with different > spellings. > > Michael, have you just created a variant edition of the listserv > messages? > > Grins, > James > > > On 6/30/07 3:39 PM, "Michael Haag" wrote: > >> It is a desperate attempt by certain academics to create a variant >> edition where none exists. It is Caesar's Vast Ghost, punkt. >> >> :Michael >> >> >>> On Saturday, June 30, 2007, at 09:51 pm, Marc Piel wrote: >>> >>> >>> I do have another question... why have I read >>> posts about "great cesar's ghost" , when my Faber >>> edition is titled "Cesar's vast ghost", book which >>> I enjoyed. > > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > From odos.fanourios at gmail.com Sun Jul 1 15:09:43 2007 From: odos.fanourios at gmail.com (James Gifford) Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2007 16:09:43 -0600 Subject: [ilds] Revolt In-Reply-To: <3BB5E700-2757-11DC-A02E-000393B1149C@btinternet.com> Message-ID: Charles suggests (and Michael concurs that he finds it likely): > that is curious about Durrell making changes for > the _Revolt_ by using the American editions. ... > perhaps he was simply making an opportunistic > move to use the books right there on his shelf, > or to the editions that he did not mind trashing > with notes to the publisher? Without additional > evidence, I bet small change upon the latter > situation. In this instance, I don't think so. Durrell noted inside the book: (my own corrected and proofread copy) Sommieres 1969 It includes substantial revisions, corrections, underlinings, and annotations to the Dutton edition, second printing. It also holds his changes to 23 pages for what he describes as the "Parthenon problem" as well as notes for changes to 40 other pages, 23 "misprints", and his multiply underlined note "US Edition". It's always possible that Durrell faked it in order to give away a more valuably copy by virtue of those comments, but making extensive annotations to more than 86 page in order to do that seems highly unlikely. Now I'm hunting for the companion _Nunquam_ volume... Best, James From michaelhaag at btinternet.com Sun Jul 1 15:44:50 2007 From: michaelhaag at btinternet.com (Michael Haag) Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2007 23:44:50 +0100 Subject: [ilds] Revolt In-Reply-To: Message-ID: The point of interest is whether, as James argues, Durrell is creating a variant edition. Maybe he is, and then again maybe he is not; we need to know more. For example, were the Faber and the Dutton editions identical to start with? If yes, then by making alterations to the Dutton edition he may be intending to make the same alterations to the Faber edition, ie he simply hands the altered copy to Faber or to both Faber and Dutton. If no, then is Durrell bringing the Dutton edition into line with the Faber edition? From what James says, Durrell seems also to be using this copy to reorganise and alter a significant section of the book, that drunken speech atop the Acropolis I presume. But if he is doing this, it would be to alter that section in both the Dutton and the Faber editions. In short, is there any evidence that Durrell is using this particular book to turn the American edition into a different version than the British edition? My comment about Durrell not attempting to create variant editions applied to the Alexandria Quartet only; I can follow plainly enough how things shambled along in that case, with variations coming into existence simply through carelessness, not intent. I do not know enough about Tunc and Nunquam to say Durrell did or did not attempt to create a variant US edition. Is there any evidence that he was dealing independently with his American publishers? Possibly he was, but it would be good to have evidence that he was. Without evidence to the contrary, the situation seems to remain as Charles has described it below. :Michael On Sunday, July 1, 2007, at 11:09 pm, James Gifford wrote: > Charles suggests (and Michael concurs that he finds it likely): > >> that is curious about Durrell making changes for >> the _Revolt_ by using the American editions. ... >> perhaps he was simply making an opportunistic >> move to use the books right there on his shelf, >> or to the editions that he did not mind trashing >> with notes to the publisher? Without additional >> evidence, I bet small change upon the latter >> situation. > > In this instance, I don't think so. Durrell noted inside the book: > > (my own corrected and > proofread copy) > > Sommieres 1969 > > It includes substantial revisions, corrections, underlinings, and > annotations to the Dutton edition, second printing. It also holds his > changes to 23 pages for what he describes as the "Parthenon problem" > as well > as notes for changes to 40 other pages, 23 "misprints", and his > multiply > underlined note "US Edition". > > It's always possible that Durrell faked it in order to give away a more > valuably copy by virtue of those comments, but making extensive > annotations > to more than 86 page in order to do that seems highly unlikely. Now > I'm > hunting for the companion _Nunquam_ volume... > > Best, > James > > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > From michaelhaag at btinternet.com Sun Jul 1 15:52:27 2007 From: michaelhaag at btinternet.com (Michael Haag) Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2007 23:52:27 +0100 Subject: [ilds] Alexandria Quartet covers Message-ID: I attach variant covers for the Alexandria Quartet, similar to the present Faber covers yet subtly different. :Michael -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Cheopscycle.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 42457 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070701/ee15f598/attachment.jpg -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Cheopscycle2.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 34049 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070701/ee15f598/attachment-0001.jpg From bredwine1968 at earthlink.net Sun Jul 1 16:16:12 2007 From: bredwine1968 at earthlink.net (Bruce Redwine) Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2007 16:16:12 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [ilds] Alexandria Quartet covers Message-ID: <17452178.1183331772848.JavaMail.root@elwamui-little.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Another possibility is an illustration, drawing or photo, of the scene which Edward Whittemore begins Jerusalem Poker (1978). The Prologue starts with, "In the first light of an early summer day a naked Junker baron and his naked wife, both elderly, both heavily overweight and sweating, stood on top of the Great Pyramid waiting for sunrise," and it goes on from there. That sounds more in keeping with the spirit of the Quartet, although I don't recall any Junker barons among Durrell's Alexandrians. But that's a minor detail for marketing to handle. Bruce -----Original Message----- >From: Michael Haag >Sent: Jul 1, 2007 3:52 PM >To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca >Subject: [ilds] Alexandria Quartet covers > >I attach variant covers for the Alexandria Quartet, similar to the >present Faber covers yet subtly different. > >:Michael > > From dtart at bigpond.net.au Sun Jul 1 21:14:52 2007 From: dtart at bigpond.net.au (Denise Tart & David Green) Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 14:14:52 +1000 Subject: [ilds] Bitter Lemons Message-ID: <005301c7bc5f$8a1140d0$0202a8c0@MumandDad> Bitter lemons is quite different from Reflections and Prospero and shows a maturing writer growing in power. The history and culture and personality of the island is infered through character, landscape and events rather than directly described in specific chapters devoted to that purpose. I also think that in Reflections and Prospero Durrell was essentially reacting to landscape and manners rather than to, as in the case of Bitter Lemons, a specific and tragic series of events that evolved around the writer as he sought to make his home there. As such, it is far more a novel than the earlier island books and lacks their optimism about Greek space. re reading the book as I am now, I feel Durrell was hurt by his experiences on Cyprus. The bar scene where Frangos attempts picks a fight with Durrell is portentious and, despite its high points, the book moves inexorably toward the collapse in relations between the British administartion and the locals and Larry's flight from the island. It is interesting to note that after the Cyprus experience, Durrell hies it France and, although he visits Greece again, he never seeks to live there again. Bitter Lemons marks the end of an era for the author, a moving on. It is an excellent book - one of my favs Denise Tart & David Green 16 William Street, Marrickville NSW 2204 +61 2 9564 6165 0412 707 625 dtart at bigpond.net.au -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20070702/57515f61/attachment.html