[ilds] ILDS Digest, Vol 47, Issue 1

Yael BD yaelibd at gmail.com
Tue Feb 1 22:55:23 PST 2011


Bruce,

Indeed. I also think we should take into account issues of social class
(which as you know is very different in Britain from in the USA, being
entirely to do with birth and not money) and temperament - LD was born and
raised in India in an unusual family who largely ignored the rigid social
class boundaries of the British upper classes. LD's mother, whom he adored,
was very much an "Anglo Indian", and LD spent his formative years in a very
warm, non-rigid non-British atmosphere. He also had to cope with a very
formal education system that he would have felt like an alien in.

Then, he was forced to go to Britain for schooling - where he of course felt
a terrible culture shock. It's no wonder he hated it. He would have been
expected to conform to the behaviour and expectations of upper-class/
upper-middle class British cultural norms, which are in many ways the polar
opposite of what he had known and enjoyed in India. LD's family were (and
still are) considered very eccentric to British people. When his family
moved to England from India, they couldn't fit into the culture and moved to
Corfu, where they all found it easier to fit in, and again all of them broke
the rigid class barriers by having peasant friends - unacceptable in Britain
to move outside class circles, especially at that time.

And let's not forget the terrible weather, the uncomfortable clothing, the
lack of wine culture, the bland food  - English death on Pudding Island
indeed.


Le 31/01/11 16:55, Bruce Redwine a ?crit


Meta,




I take "Draught" to mean air, i.e., a "current of /cold/ air." English


buildings, particularly houses and flats, are not well designed, so they


let in the cold easily. How does this transfer to English character?


Well, Durrell is being cute, I think, being funny. In the context of


"the English death," however, Durrell may mean that his fellow


countrymen are inherently "cold," i.e., emotionally frigid and


unresponsive, sexually repressed, probably, unlike the warm-blooded


people of the Mediterranean, who express their feelings readily and


openly, especially in the sexual sense. That's my guess.



Bruce



On 1 February 2011 22:00, <ilds-request at lists.uvic.ca> wrote:

> 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: Myths and Metaphors (david wilde)
>   2. Re: Myths and Metaphors (Marc Piel)
>   3. Re: The Egyptian Revolution (Bruce Redwine)
>   4. Re: The Egyptian Revolution (Lee Sternthal)
>   5. Re: Myths and Metaphors (Bruce Redwine)
>   6. the origins of Cunegonde (James Gifford)
>   7. Re: The Egyptian Revolution (Bruce Redwine)
>   8. Re: the origins of Cunegonde (Bruce Redwine)
>   9. Re: the origins of Cunegonde (Marc Piel)
>  10. Re: the origins of Cunegonde (Bruce Redwine)
>  11. Re: Myths and Metaphors (William Godshalk)
>  12. Re: Myths and Metaphors (James Gifford)
>  13. Re: lively english (Denise Tart & David Green)
>  14. Re: lively english (James Gifford)
>  15. Re: lively english (Marc Piel)
>  16. Re: Myths and Metaphors (Bruce Redwine)
>  17. Re: Myths and Metaphors (Bruce Redwine)
>  18. Re: lively english (Bruce Redwine)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2011 12:22:02 -0700
> From: david wilde <wilded at hotmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [ilds] Myths and Metaphors
> To: International Lawrence Durrell Lawrence Durrell Society
>        <ilds at lists.uvic.ca>
> Message-ID: <BAY134-W22CFD4D1A3DBAFF6AD717CD8E20 at phx.gbl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
>
>
> Re:  "English Death."  Try DH Lawrence.  Sincerely  dw
>
> From: bredwine1968 at earthlink.net
> Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2011 09:32:59 -0800
> To: marcpiel at interdesign.fr; ilds at lists.uvic.ca
> CC: bredwine1968 at earthlink.net
> Subject: [ilds] Myths and Metaphors
>
>
> Marc,
>
>
> I'm not perpetuating the myth ? Lawrence G. Durrell is.  If you object to
> this portrayal of British architecture, then you should strenuously object
> to Durrell's lambasting of the English for their "English death."  That is a
> much bigger myth, as your "wonderful time" with the English girls suggests.
>  By the way, just what is the "English death?"  I read through The Black
> Book and could never find a clear statement of whatever LGD meant by it.
>  Clarity, however, is not something we should expect of our author.  The man
> lives for metaphors, and metaphors are not the clear statements of analytic
> philosophy (another English vice).
>
>
>
>
> Bruce
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Jan 31, 2011, at 8:55 AM, Marc Piel wrote:
>
> Bruce,
> Why perpetrate this Myth?
> British often put on the "outside architecture"
> that you describe, but inside it is very different.
>
> I lived in Norht America for 4,5 years, and often
> people would say to me "you must come to dinner
> one night", but it was not until a week before I
> left that we were really invited to dinner on
> "Saturday night".
>
> I also lived in London for 1,5 years and had a
> wonderful time with the english that I met....
> especially the girls....
>
> B.R.
> Marc
>
> Le 31/01/11 16:55, Bruce Redwine a ?crit :
>
> Meta,
>
>
>
> I take "Draught" to mean air, i.e., a "current of /cold/ air." English
>
> buildings, particularly houses and flats, are not well designed, so they
>
> let in the cold easily. How does this transfer to English character?
>
> Well, Durrell is being cute, I think, being funny. In the context of
>
> "the English death," however, Durrell may mean that his fellow
>
> countrymen are inherently "cold," i.e., emotionally frigid and
>
> unresponsive, sexually repressed, probably, unlike the warm-blooded
>
> people of the Mediterranean, who express their feelings readily and
>
> openly, especially in the sexual sense. That's my guess.
>
>
>
>
>
> Bruce
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Jan 31, 2011, at 6:50 AM, Meta Cerar wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Hello, everyone,
>
>
>
>
>
> My sincerest thanks to everyone who responded to my post about the
>
>
> Dark Labyrinth and supplied me with lots of useful articles. I haven't
>
>
> had time to read them yet as I'm just finishing the translation
>
>
> revision. Although I have gone through the text a couple of times, I'm
>
>
> still at a loss with a few sentences. Perhaps you can help me with
>
>
> suggestions.
>
>
>
>
>
> There is a sentence in the chapter /Portraits/ where Campion is
>
>
> complaining about The English not being able to appreciate artists. I
>
>
> quote:
>
>
>
>
>
> *English architecture, like the English character, is founded on the
>
>
> Draught.*
>
>
>
>
>
> I compared three translations of D.L. ? French, Italian and German ?
>
>
> and they're all different. The French translate Draught as dessin
>
>
> (drawing), Italians as rigidity, Germans as Zug (stroke?
>
>
> Draughtiness?). My friend, himself an English writer, suggests ?hard
>
>
> work? or perhaps ?draught as current of air?. How can nation's
>
>
> character be founded on drawing, hard work, draughtiness ??
>
>
>
>
>
> I'm a bit desperate about this one, so I could use a few suggestions.
>
>
> It's interesting to read translations of the same book into different
>
>
> languages ? worth a comparative study, really. Sometimes it's hard to
>
>
> believe it's the same book.
>
>
>
>
>
> Thank you and all best,
>
>
>
>
>
> Meta Cerar
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________ 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/eab3e397/attachment-0001.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2011 20:46:25 +0100
> From: Marc Piel <marcpiel at interdesign.fr>
> Subject: Re: [ilds] Myths and Metaphors
> To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca
> Message-ID: <4D471191.9070104 at interdesign.fr>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
>
> Hello Bruce,
> If you are defending ideas, (out of their context)
> that were written over 50 years ago, then you are
> perpetuating. N'est ce pas?
>
> I could talk about the "French death" for so much
> has changed in 50 years. But LD would certainly
> object as he chose to live his last years here.
> But who am I to suggest what he might have said?
> Marc
>
> Le 31/01/11 18:32, Bruce Redwine a ?crit :
> > Marc,
> >
> > I'm not perpetuating the myth ? Lawrence G. Durrell is. If you object to
> > this portrayal of British architecture, then you should strenuously
> > object to Durrell's lambasting of the English for their "English death."
> > That is a much bigger myth, as your "wonderful time" with the English
> > girls suggests. By the way, just what is the "English death?" I read
> > through /The Black Book/ and could never find a clear statement of
> > whatever LGD meant by it. Clarity, however, is not something we should
> > expect of our author. The man lives for metaphors, and metaphors are not
> > the clear statements of analytic philosophy (another English vice).
> >
> >
> > Bruce
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Jan 31, 2011, at 8:55 AM, Marc Piel wrote:
> >
> >> Bruce,
> >> Why perpetrate this Myth?
> >> British often put on the "outside architecture"
> >> that you describe, but inside it is very different.
> >>
> >> I lived in Norht America for 4,5 years, and often
> >> people would say to me "you must come to dinner
> >> one night", but it was not until a week before I
> >> left that we were really invited to dinner on
> >> "Saturday night".
> >>
> >> I also lived in London for 1,5 years and had a
> >> wonderful time with the english that I met....
> >> especially the girls....
> >>
> >> B.R.
> >> Marc
> >>
> >> Le 31/01/11 16:55, Bruce Redwine a ?crit :
> >>> Meta,
> >>>
> >>> I take "Draught" to mean air, i.e., a "current of /cold/ air." English
> >>> buildings, particularly houses and flats, are not well designed, so
> they
> >>> let in the cold easily. How does this transfer to English character?
> >>> Well, Durrell is being cute, I think, being funny. In the context of
> >>> "the English death," however, Durrell may mean that his fellow
> >>> countrymen are inherently "cold," i.e., emotionally frigid and
> >>> unresponsive, sexually repressed, probably, unlike the warm-blooded
> >>> people of the Mediterranean, who express their feelings readily and
> >>> openly, especially in the sexual sense. That's my guess.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Bruce
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Jan 31, 2011, at 6:50 AM, Meta Cerar wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Hello, everyone,
> >>>>
> >>>> My sincerest thanks to everyone who responded to my post about the
> >>>> Dark Labyrinth and supplied me with lots of useful articles. I haven't
> >>>> had time to read them yet as I'm just finishing the translation
> >>>> revision. Although I have gone through the text a couple of times, I'm
> >>>> still at a loss with a few sentences. Perhaps you can help me with
> >>>> suggestions.
> >>>>
> >>>> There is a sentence in the chapter /Portraits/ where Campion is
> >>>> complaining about The English not being able to appreciate artists. I
> >>>> quote:
> >>>>
> >>>> *English architecture, like the English character, is founded on the
> >>>> Draught.*
> >>>>
> >>>> I compared three translations of D.L. ? French, Italian and German ?
> >>>> and they're all different. The French translate Draught as dessin
> >>>> (drawing), Italians as rigidity, Germans as Zug (stroke?
> >>>> Draughtiness?). My friend, himself an English writer, suggests ?hard
> >>>> work? or perhaps ?draught as current of air?. How can nation's
> >>>> character be founded on drawing, hard work, draughtiness ??
> >>>>
> >>>> I'm a bit desperate about this one, so I could use a few suggestions.
> >>>> It's interesting to read translations of the same book into different
> >>>> languages ? worth a comparative study, really. Sometimes it's hard to
> >>>> believe it's the same book.
> >>>>
> >>>> Thank you and all best,
> >>>>
> >>>> Meta Cerar
> >>>>
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > ILDS mailing list
> > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca
> > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2011 12:16:18 -0800
> From: Bruce Redwine <bredwine1968 at earthlink.net>
> Subject: Re: [ilds] The Egyptian Revolution
> To: gifford at fdu.edu, ilds at lists.uvic.ca
> Cc: Bruce Redwine <bredwine1968 at earthlink.net>
> Message-ID: <8E65EC23-F268-4091-B3F8-F8351A0BDE35 at earthlink.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> James,
>
> Yes.  I think you're right about Miller's and Durrell's pessimism about the
> fate of revolutions and those who lead them.  This reminds me of
> Epicureanism, Epicurus's "Garden," one of the major schools of Hellenistic
> philosophy.  Ultimately, Epicureanism is a rejection of the world and a
> withdrawal into one own private "garden."  Does this have something to do
> with Durrell's Heraldic Universe, as he describes it below?  Was the escape
> to Corfu an escape into a private garden and retreat?  Avoiding the social
> politics of the day?  Later in Alexandria, during the war, Durrell
> criticizes Horace for this withdrawal in "Loeb's Horace," but he himself had
> his own gardens.  I'm reminded of Marvell and his garden poems.  Andrew
> Marvell lived during Oliver Cromwell's revolution.  He was involved in
> Puritan politics, but he was not a Puritan, and some of his best poetry is
> about gardens and what they represent.  I see similarities between Durrell
> and Marvell.
>
>
> Bruce
>
>
>
> On Jan 31, 2011, at 8:44 AM, James Gifford wrote:
>
> > On 31/01/11 7:40 AM, Bruce Redwine wrote:
> >> Recall how the Lenin and the Bolsheviks took
> >> control.  In the Egyptian situation, the ones
> >> who appear incorruptible and beyond reproach
> >> may end up ruling.  Robespierre was known as
> >> "the Incorruptible."
> >
> > In a sense, this is what I mean by turning to the "antiauthoritarian" in
> > Durrell's works, in particular during the 30s and 40s, and I think it's
> > where there's common ground with Henry Miller's explicit anarchism:
> >
> > "I am against revolutions because they always involve a return to the
> > status quo. I am against the status quo both before and after
> > revolutions. I don't want to wear a black shirt or a red shirt. I want
> > to wear the shirt that suits my taste." (Miller's "Open Letter to
> > Surrealists Everywhere" 160).
> >
> > Miller wrote that essay in response to Herbert Read's short lived
> > support for Communism while boosting Surrealism:
> >
> > "[Surrealism only succeeds] in the degree to which it leads to
> > revolutionary actions" (8) and "work[s] for the transformation of this
> > imperfect world." (13)
> >
> > Durrell responded to precisely the same issue in his first letter to
> > Miller describing the Heraldic Universe, which was in reaction to Miller
> > sending him a copy of Read's above speech:
> >
> > "the Heraldic Universe.... will never be chic because it is my personal
> > property and I don't want any movement made up of people who agree with
> > each other even on first principles" (Durrell & Miller Letters 20).
> >
> > The last few words are directly from Read's speech. Yet, for Durrell,
> > the matter is slightly different, his problem being Read's suggestion:
> >
> > "That the artist must be a socialist, for example. That he wants to
> > transform the world. (He wants to transform men.)" (Durrell
> > and Miller Letters 18).
> >
> > The rebuttal of Read's "transformation of this imperfect world" is
> > fairly clear there.  Eventually, however, he got to "No Clue to Living"
> > in 1960:
> >
> > "One supposes that the Artist as a public Opinionator only grew up with
> > the social conscience -- with Dickens, Tolstoy and Dostoevsky....
> > [T]here come hundreds of letters asking him to take up public positions
> > on every conceivable matter.... But it is very doubtful whether he has
> > anything to say which could be more original than the other
> > pronouncements by public figures, for apart from his art he is just an
> > ordinary fellow like everyone else." (17)
> >
> > One can't help but wonder if we're all just ordinary fellows, and hence
> > the kind of power vested in a Lenin, Robespierre, and so forth is ill
> > advised...  They have no greater incorruptibility nor immunity to
> > temptation than any of us.
> >
> > Best,
> > James
> >
> >
> > On 31/01/11 7:40 AM, Bruce Redwine wrote:
> >> I think the Egyptian people want their impoverished lot improved and
> >> are tired of being rule by a corrupt oligarchy (the Memlik types).
> >> Doesn't this remind you of the French Revolution?  Whether or not a
> >> democracy can provide that in the short term is questionable.  I fear
> >> that the Islamists, such as the Muslim Brotherhood, are better
> >> organized and better capable of seizing power.  They also have great
> >> religious fervor and appeal to a strong religious impulse.  Recall
> >> how the Lenin and the Bolsheviks took control.  In the Egyptian
> >> situation, the ones who appear incorruptible and beyond reproach may
> >> end up ruling.  Robespierre was known as "the Incorruptible."
> >>
> >>
> >> BR
> >>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2011 12:25:30 -0800
> From: Lee Sternthal <lasternthal at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [ilds] The Egyptian Revolution
> To: "gifford at fdu.edu" <gifford at fdu.edu>,        "ilds at lists.uvic.ca"
>        <ilds at lists.uvic.ca>
> Cc: "ilds at lists.uvic.ca" <ilds at lists.uvic.ca>
> Message-ID: <503C1D85-A38B-4802-A7EF-0CA9DB66BDE2 at gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain;       charset=us-ascii
>
> One thing I'm fairly certain of: H.M. And L.D. would have had as little
> faith in "the people" as they would the government to determine they're
> collective fate when the system broke down.
>
> What I'm not sure of is what the next step in their thought process would
> have been; H.M. might not have like revolution, but what to do when you're
> caught up in the middle of one?  I've often felt his anarcho-political
> philosophy was created as if sitting on a perch, high above, unconnected.
>  How much can you trust a political observation made from that vantage
> point?  Is it just another editorial, full of hot air, but of little use.
>  L.D., of course, lived through, and was directly affected by an Islamist
> revolution of his own time, but I wonder if the nature of the people has
> changed. If they fall into fanaticism...democracy used to vote in
> totalitarianism...is there a term for that other than irony?
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jan 31, 2011, at 8:44 AM, James Gifford <james.d.gifford at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > On 31/01/11 7:40 AM, Bruce Redwine wrote:
> >> Recall how the Lenin and the Bolsheviks took
> >> control.  In the Egyptian situation, the ones
> >> who appear incorruptible and beyond reproach
> >> may end up ruling.  Robespierre was known as
> >> "the Incorruptible."
> >
> > In a sense, this is what I mean by turning to the "antiauthoritarian" in
> > Durrell's works, in particular during the 30s and 40s, and I think it's
> > where there's common ground with Henry Miller's explicit anarchism:
> >
> > "I am against revolutions because they always involve a return to the
> > status quo. I am against the status quo both before and after
> > revolutions. I don't want to wear a black shirt or a red shirt. I want
> > to wear the shirt that suits my taste." (Miller's "Open Letter to
> > Surrealists Everywhere" 160).
> >
> > Miller wrote that essay in response to Herbert Read's short lived
> > support for Communism while boosting Surrealism:
> >
> > "[Surrealism only succeeds] in the degree to which it leads to
> > revolutionary actions" (8) and "work[s] for the transformation of this
> > imperfect world." (13)
> >
> > Durrell responded to precisely the same issue in his first letter to
> > Miller describing the Heraldic Universe, which was in reaction to Miller
> > sending him a copy of Read's above speech:
> >
> > "the Heraldic Universe.... will never be chic because it is my personal
> > property and I don't want any movement made up of people who agree with
> > each other even on first principles" (Durrell & Miller Letters 20).
> >
> > The last few words are directly from Read's speech. Yet, for Durrell,
> > the matter is slightly different, his problem being Read's suggestion:
> >
> > "That the artist must be a socialist, for example. That he wants to
> > transform the world. (He wants to transform men.)" (Durrell
> > and Miller Letters 18).
> >
> > The rebuttal of Read's "transformation of this imperfect world" is
> > fairly clear there.  Eventually, however, he got to "No Clue to Living"
> > in 1960:
> >
> > "One supposes that the Artist as a public Opinionator only grew up with
> > the social conscience -- with Dickens, Tolstoy and Dostoevsky....
> > [T]here come hundreds of letters asking him to take up public positions
> > on every conceivable matter.... But it is very doubtful whether he has
> > anything to say which could be more original than the other
> > pronouncements by public figures, for apart from his art he is just an
> > ordinary fellow like everyone else." (17)
> >
> > One can't help but wonder if we're all just ordinary fellows, and hence
> > the kind of power vested in a Lenin, Robespierre, and so forth is ill
> > advised...  They have no greater incorruptibility nor immunity to
> > temptation than any of us.
> >
> > Best,
> > James
> >
> >
> > On 31/01/11 7:40 AM, Bruce Redwine wrote:
> >> I think the Egyptian people want their impoverished lot improved and
> >> are tired of being rule by a corrupt oligarchy (the Memlik types).
> >> Doesn't this remind you of the French Revolution?  Whether or not a
> >> democracy can provide that in the short term is questionable.  I fear
> >> that the Islamists, such as the Muslim Brotherhood, are better
> >> organized and better capable of seizing power.  They also have great
> >> religious fervor and appeal to a strong religious impulse.  Recall
> >> how the Lenin and the Bolsheviks took control.  In the Egyptian
> >> situation, the ones who appear incorruptible and beyond reproach may
> >> end up ruling.  Robespierre was known as "the Incorruptible."
> >>
> >>
> >> BR
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > ILDS mailing list
> > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca
> > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2011 12:56:26 -0800
> From: Bruce Redwine <bredwine1968 at earthlink.net>
> Subject: Re: [ilds] Myths and Metaphors
> To: marcpiel at interdesign.fr, ilds at lists.uvic.ca
> Cc: Bruce Redwine <bredwine1968 at earthlink.net>
> Message-ID: <6936BE2F-AC10-441B-B196-E07A93E3E059 at earthlink.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
>
> Marc,
>
> I don't see your point.  I'm talking about Durrell's usage of the clich?,
> and the idea of London as a cold, foggy, and inhospitable place, full
> drafty, poorly-insulated architecture, is very, very old ? and undoubtedly
> true.  (That's probably why you see old LD going about in a sweater, pea
> jacket, and scarf all the time ? he never got over his London days.)
>  Dickens's London illustrates this.  Read Dickens's Bleak House or Conrad's
> Secret Agent.  As to the "English death," I've never understood what that
> meant.
>
>
> Bruce
>
>
>
> On Jan 31, 2011, at 11:46 AM, Marc Piel wrote:
>
> > Hello Bruce,
> > If you are defending ideas, (out of their context)
> > that were written over 50 years ago, then you are
> > perpetuating. N'est ce pas?
> >
> > I could talk about the "French death" for so much
> > has changed in 50 years. But LD would certainly
> > object as he chose to live his last years here.
> > But who am I to suggest what he might have said?
> > Marc
> >
> > Le 31/01/11 18:32, Bruce Redwine a ?crit :
> >> Marc,
> >>
> >> I'm not perpetuating the myth ? Lawrence G. Durrell is. If you object to
> >> this portrayal of British architecture, then you should strenuously
> >> object to Durrell's lambasting of the English for their "English death."
> >> That is a much bigger myth, as your "wonderful time" with the English
> >> girls suggests. By the way, just what is the "English death?" I read
> >> through /The Black Book/ and could never find a clear statement of
> >> whatever LGD meant by it. Clarity, however, is not something we should
> >> expect of our author. The man lives for metaphors, and metaphors are not
> >> the clear statements of analytic philosophy (another English vice).
> >>
> >>
> >> Bruce
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Jan 31, 2011, at 8:55 AM, Marc Piel wrote:
> >>
> >>> Bruce,
> >>> Why perpetrate this Myth?
> >>> British often put on the "outside architecture"
> >>> that you describe, but inside it is very different.
> >>>
> >>> I lived in Norht America for 4,5 years, and often
> >>> people would say to me "you must come to dinner
> >>> one night", but it was not until a week before I
> >>> left that we were really invited to dinner on
> >>> "Saturday night".
> >>>
> >>> I also lived in London for 1,5 years and had a
> >>> wonderful time with the english that I met....
> >>> especially the girls....
> >>>
> >>> B.R.
> >>> Marc
> >>>
> >>> Le 31/01/11 16:55, Bruce Redwine a ?crit :
> >>>> Meta,
> >>>>
> >>>> I take "Draught" to mean air, i.e., a "current of /cold/ air." English
> >>>> buildings, particularly houses and flats, are not well designed, so
> they
> >>>> let in the cold easily. How does this transfer to English character?
> >>>> Well, Durrell is being cute, I think, being funny. In the context of
> >>>> "the English death," however, Durrell may mean that his fellow
> >>>> countrymen are inherently "cold," i.e., emotionally frigid and
> >>>> unresponsive, sexually repressed, probably, unlike the warm-blooded
> >>>> people of the Mediterranean, who express their feelings readily and
> >>>> openly, especially in the sexual sense. That's my guess.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Bruce
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Jan 31, 2011, at 6:50 AM, Meta Cerar wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Hello, everyone,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> My sincerest thanks to everyone who responded to my post about the
> >>>>> Dark Labyrinth and supplied me with lots of useful articles. I
> haven't
> >>>>> had time to read them yet as I'm just finishing the translation
> >>>>> revision. Although I have gone through the text a couple of times,
> I'm
> >>>>> still at a loss with a few sentences. Perhaps you can help me with
> >>>>> suggestions.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> There is a sentence in the chapter /Portraits/ where Campion is
> >>>>> complaining about The English not being able to appreciate artists. I
> >>>>> quote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> *English architecture, like the English character, is founded on the
> >>>>> Draught.*
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I compared three translations of D.L. ? French, Italian and German ?
> >>>>> and they're all different. The French translate Draught as dessin
> >>>>> (drawing), Italians as rigidity, Germans as Zug (stroke?
> >>>>> Draughtiness?). My friend, himself an English writer, suggests ?hard
> >>>>> work? or perhaps ?draught as current of air?. How can nation's
> >>>>> character be founded on drawing, hard work, draughtiness ??
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I'm a bit desperate about this one, so I could use a few suggestions.
> >>>>> It's interesting to read translations of the same book into different
> >>>>> languages ? worth a comparative study, really. Sometimes it's hard to
> >>>>> believe it's the same book.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thank you and all best,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Meta Cerar
> >>>>>
> >>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
> http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20110131/125de155/attachment-0001.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2011 13:17:35 -0800
> From: James Gifford <james.d.gifford at gmail.com>
> Subject: [ilds] the origins of Cunegonde
> To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca
> Message-ID: <4D4726EF.1050200 at gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
>
> 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 Cun?gonde,
> > 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 /k?hn/ 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
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2011 13:05:54 -0800
> From: Bruce Redwine <bredwine1968 at earthlink.net>
> Subject: Re: [ilds] The Egyptian Revolution
> To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca
> Cc: Bruce Redwine <bredwine1968 at earthlink.net>
> Message-ID: <4551FB0D-71E5-40A1-AD57-1E928C34AFC2 at earthlink.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> I agree.  Miller is no use in dealing with political reality.  He's not to
> be trusted.  Miller's Big Sur and Durrell's Tibet are really about
> withdrawing from humanity and letting the human race follow its own
> self-destructive path.  I can see their point.
>
>
> Bruce
>
>
>
> On Jan 31, 2011, at 12:25 PM, Lee Sternthal wrote:
>
> > One thing I'm fairly certain of: H.M. And L.D. would have had as little
> faith in "the people" as they would the government to determine they're
> collective fate when the system broke down.
> >
> > What I'm not sure of is what the next step in their thought process would
> have been; H.M. might not have like revolution, but what to do when you're
> caught up in the middle of one?  I've often felt his anarcho-political
> philosophy was created as if sitting on a perch, high above, unconnected.
>  How much can you trust a political observation made from that vantage
> point?  Is it just another editorial, full of hot air, but of little use.
>  L.D., of course, lived through, and was directly affected by an Islamist
> revolution of his own time, but I wonder if the nature of the people has
> changed. If they fall into fanaticism...democracy used to vote in
> totalitarianism...is there a term for that other than irony?
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> > On Jan 31, 2011, at 8:44 AM, James Gifford <james.d.gifford at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> On 31/01/11 7:40 AM, Bruce Redwine wrote:
> >>> Recall how the Lenin and the Bolsheviks took
> >>> control.  In the Egyptian situation, the ones
> >>> who appear incorruptible and beyond reproach
> >>> may end up ruling.  Robespierre was known as
> >>> "the Incorruptible."
> >>
> >> In a sense, this is what I mean by turning to the "antiauthoritarian" in
> >> Durrell's works, in particular during the 30s and 40s, and I think it's
> >> where there's common ground with Henry Miller's explicit anarchism:
> >>
> >> "I am against revolutions because they always involve a return to the
> >> status quo. I am against the status quo both before and after
> >> revolutions. I don't want to wear a black shirt or a red shirt. I want
> >> to wear the shirt that suits my taste." (Miller's "Open Letter to
> >> Surrealists Everywhere" 160).
> >>
> >> Miller wrote that essay in response to Herbert Read's short lived
> >> support for Communism while boosting Surrealism:
> >>
> >> "[Surrealism only succeeds] in the degree to which it leads to
> >> revolutionary actions" (8) and "work[s] for the transformation of this
> >> imperfect world." (13)
> >>
> >> Durrell responded to precisely the same issue in his first letter to
> >> Miller describing the Heraldic Universe, which was in reaction to Miller
> >> sending him a copy of Read's above speech:
> >>
> >> "the Heraldic Universe.... will never be chic because it is my personal
> >> property and I don't want any movement made up of people who agree with
> >> each other even on first principles" (Durrell & Miller Letters 20).
> >>
> >> The last few words are directly from Read's speech. Yet, for Durrell,
> >> the matter is slightly different, his problem being Read's suggestion:
> >>
> >> "That the artist must be a socialist, for example. That he wants to
> >> transform the world. (He wants to transform men.)" (Durrell
> >> and Miller Letters 18).
> >>
> >> The rebuttal of Read's "transformation of this imperfect world" is
> >> fairly clear there.  Eventually, however, he got to "No Clue to Living"
> >> in 1960:
> >>
> >> "One supposes that the Artist as a public Opinionator only grew up with
> >> the social conscience -- with Dickens, Tolstoy and Dostoevsky....
> >> [T]here come hundreds of letters asking him to take up public positions
> >> on every conceivable matter.... But it is very doubtful whether he has
> >> anything to say which could be more original than the other
> >> pronouncements by public figures, for apart from his art he is just an
> >> ordinary fellow like everyone else." (17)
> >>
> >> One can't help but wonder if we're all just ordinary fellows, and hence
> >> the kind of power vested in a Lenin, Robespierre, and so forth is ill
> >> advised...  They have no greater incorruptibility nor immunity to
> >> temptation than any of us.
> >>
> >> Best,
> >> James
> >>
> >>
> >> On 31/01/11 7:40 AM, Bruce Redwine wrote:
> >>> I think the Egyptian people want their impoverished lot improved and
> >>> are tired of being rule by a corrupt oligarchy (the Memlik types).
> >>> Doesn't this remind you of the French Revolution?  Whether or not a
> >>> democracy can provide that in the short term is questionable.  I fear
> >>> that the Islamists, such as the Muslim Brotherhood, are better
> >>> organized and better capable of seizing power.  They also have great
> >>> religious fervor and appeal to a strong religious impulse.  Recall
> >>> how the Lenin and the Bolsheviks took control.  In the Egyptian
> >>> situation, the ones who appear incorruptible and beyond reproach may
> >>> end up ruling.  Robespierre was known as "the Incorruptible."
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> BR
> >>>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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: 8
> Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2011 13:47:31 -0800
> From: Bruce Redwine <bredwine1968 at earthlink.net>
> Subject: Re: [ilds] the origins of Cunegonde
> To: gifford at fdu.edu, ilds at lists.uvic.ca
> Cc: Bruce Redwine <bredwine1968 at earthlink.net>
> Message-ID: <902B00DB-A90D-4F3D-8DD8-E5CA90D96356 at earthlink.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
>
> James,
>
> Humor is undoubtedly also one of those things that exist in the eye or mind
> of the beholder.  And for me, anyway, Cun?gonde 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.
>
>
> Bruce
>
>
>
> 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 Cun?gonde,
> >> 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 /k?hn/ 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-0001.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2011 00:20:57 +0100
> From: Marc Piel <marcpiel at interdesign.fr>
> Subject: Re: [ilds] the origins of Cunegonde
> To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca
> Message-ID: <4D4743D9.50500 at interdesign.fr>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
>
> Think about when LD wrote this. Does it make sense
> that he would be "childish, boyish, prurient,
> prankish, etc" at that time.
> I know I wouldn't be!
> B.R.
> Marc
>
> Le 31/01/11 22:47, Bruce Redwine a ?crit :
> > James,
> >
> > Humor is undoubtedly also one of those things that exist in the eye or
> > mind of the beholder. And for me, anyway, Cun?gonde 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.
> >
> >
> > Bruce
> >
> >
> >
> > 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 Cun?gonde,
> >>> 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 /k?hn/ 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 <mailto:ILDS at lists.uvic.ca>
> >>> https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> ILDS mailing list
> >> ILDS at lists.uvic.ca <mailto: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: 10
> Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2011 16:36:46 -0800
> From: Bruce Redwine <bredwine1968 at earthlink.net>
> Subject: Re: [ilds] the origins of Cunegonde
> To: marcpiel at interdesign.fr, ilds at lists.uvic.ca
> Cc: Bruce Redwine <bredwine1968 at earthlink.net>
> Message-ID: <306298E6-59A0-487D-AD0E-40385A3EBC34 at earthlink.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
>
> Marc, yes, it makes perfect sense to me.  And what do you think of Nelson
> atop his pillar with a "phallic air?"  The image is silken, Latinate, as the
> whole poem is, but the humor is fundamentally juvenile.  The ballade form
> sounds like a play-ground chant.
>
>
> BR
>
>
> On Jan 31, 2011, at 3:20 PM, Marc Piel wrote:
>
> > Think about when LD wrote this. Does it make sense
> > that he would be "childish, boyish, prurient,
> > prankish, etc" at that time.
> > I know I wouldn't be!
> > B.R.
> > Marc
> >
> > Le 31/01/11 22:47, Bruce Redwine a ?crit :
> >> James,
> >>
> >> Humor is undoubtedly also one of those things that exist in the eye or
> >> mind of the beholder. And for me, anyway, Cun?gonde 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.
> >>
> >>
> >> Bruce
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> 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 Cun?gonde,
> >>>> 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 /k?hn/ 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
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 11
> Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2011 21:14:55 -0500
> From: William Godshalk <william.godshalk at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [ilds] Myths and Metaphors
> To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca
> Message-ID:
>        <AANLkTim8RbAe1BXQYnLsrB2iNGbR7A6tbXqY1H7hA1_m at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
>
> Similes are not quite the same as metaphors. Durrell loved similes, and
> realized that some of his similes are grotesque. He recurrently uses
> similitudes that may verge on the metaphor, but are not.
>
> Bill
>
> On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 3:56 PM, Bruce Redwine
> <bredwine1968 at earthlink.net>wrote:
>
> > Marc,
> >
> > I don't see your point.  I'm talking about Durrell's usage of the clich?,
> > and the idea of London as a cold, foggy, and inhospitable place, full
> > drafty, poorly-insulated architecture, is very, very old ? and
> undoubtedly
> > true.  (That's probably why you see old LD going about in a sweater, pea
> > jacket, and scarf all the time ? he never got over his London days.)
> >  Dickens's London illustrates this.  Read Dickens's *Bleak House *or
> > Conrad's *Secret Agent.*  As to the "English death," I've never
> understood
> > what that meant.
> >
> >
> > Bruce
> >
> >
> >
> > On Jan 31, 2011, at 11:46 AM, Marc Piel wrote:
> >
> > Hello Bruce,
> > If you are defending ideas, (out of their context)
> > that were written over 50 years ago, then you are
> > perpetuating. N'est ce pas?
> >
> > I could talk about the "French death" for so much
> > has changed in 50 years. But LD would certainly
> > object as he chose to live his last years here.
> > But who am I to suggest what he might have said?
> > Marc
> >
> > Le 31/01/11 18:32, Bruce Redwine a ?crit :
> >
> > Marc,
> >
> >
> > I'm not perpetuating the myth ? Lawrence G. Durrell is. If you object to
> >
> > this portrayal of British architecture, then you should strenuously
> >
> > object to Durrell's lambasting of the English for their "English death."
> >
> > That is a much bigger myth, as your "wonderful time" with the English
> >
> > girls suggests. By the way, just what is the "English death?" I read
> >
> > through /The Black Book/ and could never find a clear statement of
> >
> > whatever LGD meant by it. Clarity, however, is not something we should
> >
> > expect of our author. The man lives for metaphors, and metaphors are not
> >
> > the clear statements of analytic philosophy (another English vice).
> >
> >
> >
> > Bruce
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Jan 31, 2011, at 8:55 AM, Marc Piel wrote:
> >
> >
> > Bruce,
> >
> > Why perpetrate this Myth?
> >
> > British often put on the "outside architecture"
> >
> > that you describe, but inside it is very different.
> >
> >
> > I lived in Norht America for 4,5 years, and often
> >
> > people would say to me "you must come to dinner
> >
> > one night", but it was not until a week before I
> >
> > left that we were really invited to dinner on
> >
> > "Saturday night".
> >
> >
> > I also lived in London for 1,5 years and had a
> >
> > wonderful time with the english that I met....
> >
> > especially the girls....
> >
> >
> > B.R.
> >
> > Marc
> >
> >
> > Le 31/01/11 16:55, Bruce Redwine a ?crit :
> >
> > Meta,
> >
> >
> > I take "Draught" to mean air, i.e., a "current of /cold/ air." English
> >
> > buildings, particularly houses and flats, are not well designed, so they
> >
> > let in the cold easily. How does this transfer to English character?
> >
> > Well, Durrell is being cute, I think, being funny. In the context of
> >
> > "the English death," however, Durrell may mean that his fellow
> >
> > countrymen are inherently "cold," i.e., emotionally frigid and
> >
> > unresponsive, sexually repressed, probably, unlike the warm-blooded
> >
> > people of the Mediterranean, who express their feelings readily and
> >
> > openly, especially in the sexual sense. That's my guess.
> >
> >
> >
> > Bruce
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Jan 31, 2011, at 6:50 AM, Meta Cerar wrote:
> >
> >
> > Hello, everyone,
> >
> >
> > My sincerest thanks to everyone who responded to my post about the
> >
> > Dark Labyrinth and supplied me with lots of useful articles. I haven't
> >
> > had time to read them yet as I'm just finishing the translation
> >
> > revision. Although I have gone through the text a couple of times, I'm
> >
> > still at a loss with a few sentences. Perhaps you can help me with
> >
> > suggestions.
> >
> >
> > There is a sentence in the chapter /Portraits/ where Campion is
> >
> > complaining about The English not being able to appreciate artists. I
> >
> > quote:
> >
> >
> > *English architecture, like the English character, is founded on the
> >
> > Draught.*
> >
> >
> > I compared three translations of D.L. ? French, Italian and German ?
> >
> > and they're all different. The French translate Draught as dessin
> >
> > (drawing), Italians as rigidity, Germans as Zug (stroke?
> >
> > Draughtiness?). My friend, himself an English writer, suggests ?hard
> >
> > work? or perhaps ?draught as current of air?. How can nation's
> >
> > character be founded on drawing, hard work, draughtiness ??
> >
> >
> > I'm a bit desperate about this one, so I could use a few suggestions.
> >
> > It's interesting to read translations of the same book into different
> >
> > languages ? worth a comparative study, really. Sometimes it's hard to
> >
> > believe it's the same book.
> >
> >
> > Thank you and all best,
> >
> >
> > Meta Cerar
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/20110131/2dfa9650/attachment-0001.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 12
> Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2011 18:25:34 -0800
> From: James Gifford <james.d.gifford at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [ilds] Myths and Metaphors
> To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca
> Message-ID: <4D476F1E.5000004 at gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
>
> Bill, your postings are like jazz trumpet shots...  :)
>
> For everyone else, why not come to London in June 2012 and find out how
> the draughts flow in the Regina Hotel?
>
> -J
>
> ps: Bruce, are you baiting me with /The Secret Agent/?
>
> On 31/01/11 6:14 PM, William Godshalk wrote:
> > Similes are not quite the same as metaphors. Durrell loved similes, and
> > realized that some of his similes are grotesque. He recurrently uses
> > similitudes that may verge on the metaphor, but are not.
> >
> > Bill
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 13
> Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2011 17:47:41 +1100
> From: "Denise Tart & David Green" <dtart at bigpond.net.au>
> Subject: Re: [ilds] lively english
> To: <marcpiel at interdesign.fr>, <ilds at lists.uvic.ca>
> Message-ID: <354B41E174D548C2B0FA3CAFF51546BF at DenisePC>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="Windows-1252";
>        reply-type=original
>
> I lived in Norht America for 4,5 years, and often
> > people would say to me "you must come to dinner
> > one night", but it was not until a week before I
> > left that we were really invited to dinner on
> > "Saturday night". I also lived in London for 1,5 years and had a
> > wonderful time with the english that I met....
> > especially the girls....
>
>
> Touch? marc.  When I was living in England in the late '90s, a business
> friend of mine from Australia came to see me in Yorkshire, fresh from
> meetings and so on in the USA and he said, tellingly, "I absolutely reek of
> calvinism". we repaired immediately to the pub to cure him of this and he
> told how he had ordered a bottle of wine with lunch at one 'meeting' and
> his
> north American counterparts assumed a posture of moral shock and
> disapproval.
>
> The English are big drinkers and randy souls, always have been - once you
> get by their native reserve they can be the robust Saxons of old
>
> Perhaps the English Death is less cultural and more literary than we think.
> Larry ranted against the British literary scene in 1930s because he saw it
> as mundane, proletarian even. English Death may refer to the death of
> decent
> English Lit is his eyes - Douglas, Wilde others...silver age prose... and
> because they did not buy the budding writers style at the time.
>
> Go to the Character of Gideon in 'Marine Venus' for an affectionate study
> of
> the English Character; sometimes crusty, hostile and reserved on the
> outside
> but warm and fuzzy and sentimental on the inside. Durrell often paints very
> positive pictures of Englishmen. His fleeing England was probably more
> about
> a sense of personal failure, rejection or lack of exchange rate equity. For
> all his love of the Med. Larry spent his life amongst English people but
> preferred cheap wine and cigarettes.
>
> David Whitewine
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "Marc Piel" <marcpiel at interdesign.fr>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2011 3:55 AM
> To: <ilds at lists.uvic.ca>
> Subject: Re: [ilds] dark labyrinth
>
> > Bruce,
> > Why perpetrate this Myth?
> > British often put on the "outside architecture"
> > that you describe, but inside it is very different.
> >
> > >
> > I also lived in London for 1,5 years and had a
> > wonderful time with the english that I met....
> > especially the girls....
> >
> > B.R.
> > Marc
> >
> > Le 31/01/11 16:55, Bruce Redwine a ?crit :
> >> Meta,
> >>
> >> I take "Draught" to mean air, i.e., a "current of /cold/ air." English
> >> buildings, particularly houses and flats, are not well designed, so they
> >> let in the cold easily. How does this transfer to English character?
> >> Well, Durrell is being cute, I think, being funny. In the context of
> >> "the English death," however, Durrell may mean that his fellow
> >> countrymen are inherently "cold," i.e., emotionally frigid and
> >> unresponsive, sexually repressed, probably, unlike the warm-blooded
> >> people of the Mediterranean, who express their feelings readily and
> >> openly, especially in the sexual sense. That's my guess.
> >>
> >>
> >> Bruce
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Jan 31, 2011, at 6:50 AM, Meta Cerar wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hello, everyone,
> >>>
> >>> My sincerest thanks to everyone who responded to my post about the
> >>> Dark Labyrinth and supplied me with lots of useful articles. I haven't
> >>> had time to read them yet as I'm just finishing the translation
> >>> revision. Although I have gone through the text a couple of times, I'm
> >>> still at a loss with a few sentences. Perhaps you can help me with
> >>> suggestions.
> >>>
> >>> There is a sentence in the chapter /Portraits/ where Campion is
> >>> complaining about The English not being able to appreciate artists. I
> >>> quote:
> >>>
> >>> *English architecture, like the English character, is founded on the
> >>> Draught.*
> >>>
> >>> I compared three translations of D.L. ? French, Italian and German ?
> >>> and they're all different. The French translate Draught as dessin
> >>> (drawing), Italians as rigidity, Germans as Zug (stroke?
> >>> Draughtiness?). My friend, himself an English writer, suggests ?hard
> >>> work? or perhaps ?draught as current of air?. How can nation's
> >>> character be founded on drawing, hard work, draughtiness ??
> >>>
> >>> I'm a bit desperate about this one, so I could use a few suggestions.
> >>> It's interesting to read translations of the same book into different
> >>> languages ? worth a comparative study, really. Sometimes it's hard to
> >>> believe it's the same book.
> >>>
> >>> Thank you and all best,
> >>>
> >>> Meta Cerar
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> ILDS mailing list
> >>> ILDS at lists.uvic.ca <mailto: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
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 14
> Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2011 00:13:11 -0800
> From: James Gifford <odos.fanourios at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [ilds] lively english
> To: Durrell list <ilds at lists.uvic.ca>
> Message-ID:
>        <AANLkTiksczD4nFt52SPE7k_zmeds62+_F4fbsUzivhpQ at mail.gmail.com<AANLkTiksczD4nFt52SPE7k_zmeds62%2B_F4fbsUzivhpQ at mail.gmail.com>
> >
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> > Perhaps the English Death is less cultural and more literary
> > than we think. Larry ranted against the British literary scene
> > in 1930s because he saw it as mundane, proletarian even.
> > English Death may refer to the death of decent English Lit
> > is his eyes - Douglas, Wilde others...silver age prose... and
> > because they did not buy the budding writers style at the time.
>
> To my mind, *this* is certainly the real meat of the matter.  Surely,
> Durrell did have feelings about the English reserve or it's difference
> from his Indian childhood and Mediterranean 20s (and after...).  Those
> are all outlined fairly clearly in his prose.  Yet, the English scene
> in his first 3 novels is rife with sexuality, venereal disease,
> drinking, and a luxuriousness with art I think he associated with the
> Elizabethans.  He even describes being tempted by such a scene with
> Alan Thomas appearing as the devil tempting Christ.  The prudery
> generalized to England certainly isn't the whole story.
>
> Yet, the English Death persisted, and in many respects, I think it's a
> way of marking his break from his literary predecessors and
> contemporaries.  In the Quartet, Cavafy displaces Eliot.  In /Panic
> Spring/, he draws from the High Modernists without barely a sideways
> glance at Auden (whom he later comments on quite highly).  In /The
> Black Book/, there's a good deal of literary ancestry being rooted
> through in the family tree.  To my mind, that's where the provocative
> reading will emerge -- the spiritual torpor works well enough, but how
> much can really be said of it?  Durrell was part of a generation that
> was bumped out by the High Modernists and the Auden Generation, and I
> think that tension would have been clear in the mid 1930s.
>
> Nice observation, David.
>
> Cheers,
> James
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 15
> Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2011 14:51:38 +0100
> From: Marc Piel <marcpiel at interdesign.fr>
> Subject: Re: [ilds] lively english
> To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca
> Message-ID: <4D480FEA.4090203 at interdesign.fr>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> When you suffer moral stress at the age LD went
> back to England, it stays with you for a lifetime.
> Marc
>
> Le 01/02/11 09:13, James Gifford a ?crit :
> >> Perhaps the English Death is less cultural and more literary
> >> than we think. Larry ranted against the British literary scene
> >> in 1930s because he saw it as mundane, proletarian even.
> >> English Death may refer to the death of decent English Lit
> >> is his eyes - Douglas, Wilde others...silver age prose... and
> >> because they did not buy the budding writers style at the time.
> >
> > To my mind, *this* is certainly the real meat of the matter.  Surely,
> > Durrell did have feelings about the English reserve or it's difference
> > from his Indian childhood and Mediterranean 20s (and after...).  Those
> > are all outlined fairly clearly in his prose.  Yet, the English scene
> > in his first 3 novels is rife with sexuality, venereal disease,
> > drinking, and a luxuriousness with art I think he associated with the
> > Elizabethans.  He even describes being tempted by such a scene with
> > Alan Thomas appearing as the devil tempting Christ.  The prudery
> > generalized to England certainly isn't the whole story.
> >
> > Yet, the English Death persisted, and in many respects, I think it's a
> > way of marking his break from his literary predecessors and
> > contemporaries.  In the Quartet, Cavafy displaces Eliot.  In /Panic
> > Spring/, he draws from the High Modernists without barely a sideways
> > glance at Auden (whom he later comments on quite highly).  In /The
> > Black Book/, there's a good deal of literary ancestry being rooted
> > through in the family tree.  To my mind, that's where the provocative
> > reading will emerge -- the spiritual torpor works well enough, but how
> > much can really be said of it?  Durrell was part of a generation that
> > was bumped out by the High Modernists and the Auden Generation, and I
> > think that tension would have been clear in the mid 1930s.
> >
> > Nice observation, David.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > James
> > _______________________________________________
> > ILDS mailing list
> > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca
> > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 16
> Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2011 07:26:12 -0800
> From: Bruce Redwine <bredwine1968 at earthlink.net>
> Subject: Re: [ilds] Myths and Metaphors
> To: gifford at fdu.edu, ilds at lists.uvic.ca
> Cc: Bruce Redwine <bredwine1968 at earthlink.net>
> Message-ID: <1914AB9C-387A-46B2-8FFE-C27FC4E8E07C at earthlink.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> I'd say Bill's postings are jazz trumpet shots.
>
>
> BR
>
>
>
> On Jan 31, 2011, at 6:25 PM, James Gifford wrote:
>
> > Bill, your postings are like jazz trumpet shots...  :)
> >
> > For everyone else, why not come to London in June 2012 and find out how
> > the draughts flow in the Regina Hotel?
> >
> > -J
> >
> > ps: Bruce, are you baiting me with /The Secret Agent/?
> >
> > On 31/01/11 6:14 PM, William Godshalk wrote:
> >> Similes are not quite the same as metaphors. Durrell loved similes, and
> >> realized that some of his similes are grotesque. He recurrently uses
> >> similitudes that may verge on the metaphor, but are not.
> >>
> >> 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/20110201/65afedbc/attachment-0001.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 17
> Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2011 08:11:53 -0800
> From: Bruce Redwine <bredwine1968 at earthlink.net>
> Subject: Re: [ilds] Myths and Metaphors
> To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca
> Cc: Bruce Redwine <bredwine1968 at earthlink.net>
> Message-ID: <87967556-E49F-477A-B20B-43D12E288485 at earthlink.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
>
> True, but I don't see much of a difference, except in the emotive force of
> the language.  So,
>
> 1.  Bill's retorts are like jazz-trumpet shots.
>
> 2.  Bill's retorts are jazz-trumpet shots.
>
> What's the difference?  You can argue no. 2 is literally not true, but
> that's nit-picking and ignoring how everyday speech works.  The mind
> immediately recognizes and accepts the metaphor.  I'd argue that no. 2 is
> more powerful because the mind has created something new and exciting ?
> grafted together dissimilars.  It's a kind of myth making, creating a world.
>  Durrell's use of metaphor works in this way.  Read about "a sky of hot nude
> pearl" and you've entered Durrell's Alexandria.
>
>
> Bruce
>
>
> On Jan 31, 2011, at 6:14 PM, William Godshalk wrote:
>
> > Similes are not quite the same as metaphors. Durrell loved similes, and
> realized that some of his similes are grotesque. He recurrently uses
> similitudes that may verge on the metaphor, but are not.
> >
> > Bill
> >
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 18
> Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2011 10:28:05 -0800
> From: Bruce Redwine <bredwine1968 at earthlink.net>
> Subject: Re: [ilds] lively english
> To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca
> Cc: Bruce Redwine <bredwine1968 at earthlink.net>
> Message-ID: <24B63E9C-2292-490C-A4F6-89E5243FAF9E at earthlink.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> David and James make more sense than Durrell does.  My thanks to both of
> you.
>
>
> Bruce
>
>
>
> On Feb 1, 2011, at 12:13 AM, James Gifford wrote:
>
> >> Perhaps the English Death is less cultural and more literary
> >> than we think. Larry ranted against the British literary scene
> >> in 1930s because he saw it as mundane, proletarian even.
> >> English Death may refer to the death of decent English Lit
> >> is his eyes - Douglas, Wilde others...silver age prose... and
> >> because they did not buy the budding writers style at the time.
> >
> > To my mind, *this* is certainly the real meat of the matter.  Surely,
> > Durrell did have feelings about the English reserve or it's difference
> > from his Indian childhood and Mediterranean 20s (and after...).  Those
> > are all outlined fairly clearly in his prose.  Yet, the English scene
> > in his first 3 novels is rife with sexuality, venereal disease,
> > drinking, and a luxuriousness with art I think he associated with the
> > Elizabethans.  He even describes being tempted by such a scene with
> > Alan Thomas appearing as the devil tempting Christ.  The prudery
> > generalized to England certainly isn't the whole story.
> >
> > Yet, the English Death persisted, and in many respects, I think it's a
> > way of marking his break from his literary predecessors and
> > contemporaries.  In the Quartet, Cavafy displaces Eliot.  In /Panic
> > Spring/, he draws from the High Modernists without barely a sideways
> > glance at Auden (whom he later comments on quite highly).  In /The
> > Black Book/, there's a good deal of literary ancestry being rooted
> > through in the family tree.  To my mind, that's where the provocative
> > reading will emerge -- the spiritual torpor works well enough, but how
> > much can really be said of it?  Durrell was part of a generation that
> > was bumped out by the High Modernists and the Auden Generation, and I
> > think that tension would have been clear in the mid 1930s.
> >
> > Nice observation, David.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > James
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> ILDS mailing list
> ILDS at lists.uvic.ca
> https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds
>
>
> End of ILDS Digest, Vol 47, Issue 1
> ***********************************
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20110202/23669eee/attachment.html 


More information about the ILDS mailing list