[ilds] the origins of Cunegonde

Bruce Redwine bredwine1968 at earthlink.net
Mon Jan 31 13:47:31 PST 2011


Humor is undoubtedly also one of those things that exist in the eye or mind of the beholder.  And for me, anyway, Cunégonde would be funny without knowledge of Voltaire.  Much like tunc and the god/dog joke.  Knowledge of French and its puns, however, is necessary.  I can see your sense of humor is far more sophisticated than mine.  My kind of "lame humor" I owe in part to spending four years in the army, where experience is often at its most crude.  Some of Durrell's humor strikes me as being in his vein — childish, boyish, prurient, prankish, etc.  So, "Zeus gets Hera on her back . . . " or "a bird in the bush is worth two in the hand."  Little boys do have dirty minds, and it doesn't take much to amuse them.  I don't think Durrell ever outgrew this.  Nor have I.


On Jan 31, 2011, at 1:17 PM, James Gifford wrote:

> Bruce notes suggests, rightly, that Charles and I might take up the 
> plural interpretations of Durrell's word plays, but for the naughty 
> Cunegonde's three potential origins, he notes:
>> I would say that the only definition that
>> really counts, as far as LGD is concerned,
>> is the last one [the purely prurient]. So,
>> I don't see much ambiguity here.
> Would Cunegonde be funny without the antithetical nature of her literary 
> predecessor in Voltaire's /Candide/?  If one possessed such a doll, 
> naming it "Nancy" wouldn't seem terribly peculiar even though it's open 
> to the sexual innuendo of a "nancy boy" (or at least no more peculiar 
> than owning such a thing is already), but if "Reagan" were added as a 
> surname, it would take on a much broader humour.  I'd say the same for 
> "Fanny" becoming "Fanny Burney" rather than "Fanny Hill."  But just 
> plain old "Fanny" is clearly just plain old prurient, and it's a rather 
> lame joke if the literary predecessor isn't there -- Durrell did make 
> lame jokes, but most have that added dimension of ambiguity or plurality.
> I think Bruce's peculiar interest {winks heavily at audience} in this 
> rather silly joke in what was perhaps Durrell's most careless (and 
> final) book would be much more peculiar were it not for Voltaire's 
> penning of his own Cunegonde...
> Cheers,
> James
> On 31/01/11 10:44 AM, Bruce Redwine wrote:
>> Charles,
>> Glad to have your company once again, and thanks for the elaboration,
>> esp. the Nabokov quotation. I think this discussion of alternative
>> glosses leads to an important aspect of Durrell's method (if you can
>> call it that) of writing. Namely, ambiguity, deliberate or not. You note
>> the various readings/spellings of "draught," which is the English
>> spelling, the American is "draft." In this instance, I don't think any
>> ambiguity exists (unless you're obsessed by Kinbote's "texture").
>> Durrell is making a cute comparison between drafty English architecture
>> and the drafty English soul, if you will. But what about Cunégonde,
>> recently discussed? What's the meaning or source of that personal name?
>> We came up with three definitions/sources:
>> 1. Voltaire's /Candide,/
>> 2. Marc's etymology based on German /kühn/ and /Gund /(sic), and
>> 3. Richard's "cunt on which the sexual business of the world hinged."
>> Now, which of these meanings did Durrell intend? Or does he want, as
>> Charles and James probably think, all three to be held simultaneously in
>> the reader's mind? Does Durrell want "texture?" Quite possibly. But I
>> think only nos. 1 and 3 applied at the time of composition. Durrell's
>> source is most likely Voltaire, but what really appealed to him was the
>> sexual innuendo seen in the French, which is what Richard and Marc point
>> out and acknowledge. I would say that the only definition that really
>> counts, as far as LGD is concerned, is the last one. So, I don't see
>> much ambiguity here.
>> On the other hand, ambiguity, if that's the right word, has its place.
>> Something to do with what the reader makes of words and images. Charles
>> lists Durrell's various usages of /draught,/ and taken together these
>> contribute powerfully to the "world" of his fiction and poetry, an
>> ambience that readers find so bewitching. I don't know how to integrate
>> this into a theory of composition, but it is definitely something that
>> has to be reckoned with.
>> Bruce
>> On Jan 31, 2011, at 8:52 AM, Charles Sligh wrote:
>>> On 1/31/11 11:13 AM, James Gifford wrote:
>>>>        It's a typical Durrell wordplay
>>>>        though, generating confusion whenever possible...
>>> Thanks to our posters for these various glosses on "draught."
>>> What a translator makes of these words does matter, opening up or
>>> shutting down meanings depending upon choices. Translation is one of
>>> the highest interpretive arts, if not the highest. Good luck.
>>> Across the works, I find Durrell using "draught" to signify something
>>> atmospheric (climacteric), or something imbibed, with a few odd
>>> meanings here and there.
>>> He often seems to signify a breeze -- e.g., the numerous "cool
>>> draughts" wafting throughout his descriptions of place, and the smell
>>> of the sea, Arab bread, cognac, Chianti, the sound of music and
>>> beautiful language, and the perfume of a lover's head from the pillow
>>> can all be perceived by means of draught.
>>> But drinking scenes also take "draught," and both meanings occur in
>>> /Justine/. Synesthesia.
>>> He does use the word at least once in the sense of "play draughts."
>>> And the nautical usage appears in /Balthazar/, /Clea/, &c.
>>> The second occasion of "draught" in /The Dark Labyrinth/ is
>>> climacteric. I do not know if that would shape your reading of this
>>> initial incident.
>>> I will also gloss James' note on the OED & spellings ("draft" versus
>>> "draught" or "drought") by noting that in notebooks and typescripts
>>> Durrell was sometimes an indifferent speller.
>>> I think that, as with many writers, some of Durrell's most memorable
>>> felicities spring from this trait, and it only was compounded by his
>>> typists or typesetters who in turn made mortal slips.
>>> How the reader will react to these /felix culpas/ tells us more about
>>> the reader than anything else -- revealing whether the reader is more
>>> generally Darley or Pursewarden, more Dr. Charles Kinbote or John Shade.
>>> I also called on Coates.
>>> He was afraid he had mislaid his notes.
>>> He took his article from a steel file:
>>> 800 “It’s accurate. I have not changed her style.
>>> There’s one misprint—not that it matters much:
>>> /Mountain/, not /fountain/. The majestic touch.”
>>> Life Everlasting—based on a misprint!
>>> I mused as I drove homeward: take the hint,
>>> And stop investigating my abyss?
>>> But all at once it dawned on me that this
>>> Was the real point, the contrapuntal theme;
>>> Just this: not text, but texture; not the dream
>>> But topsy-turvical coincidence,
>>> 810 Not flimsy nonsense, but a web of sense.
>>> Yes! It sufficed that I in life could find
>>> Some kind of link-and-bobolink, some kind
>>> Of correlated pattern in the game,
>>> Plexed artistry, and something of the same
>>> Pleasure in it as they who played it found.
>>>        -- VN, /Pale Fire/ (1962)
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20110131/142c6e6d/attachment.html 

More information about the ILDS mailing list