From zahlan at earthlink.net  Mon Mar 21 08:40:36 2011
From: zahlan at earthlink.net (Anne R Zahlan)
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2011 11:40:36 -0400
Subject: [ilds] Bisexuality and Beyond
References: <AANLkTinUSMGgG9aJLwuOx-29V51BNN4WOoyfr_ESDxEf@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D86F6BD.7000903@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <D4CDB7D2FE254BE88ABE82D00AA2B92B@annezahlan1>

I do agree with James that Durrell privileges "fluidity in sexual identity" and with what I would take as corollary that Durrell did not condemn homosexuality or homosexuals--Scobie is arguably the Quartet's most delightful character. However, this discussion somehow reminded me of a conversation I had with Joseph Boone (of "Queering the Quartet") on the streets of Alexandria.  When I argued against the notion of homophobic elements in Durrell, Boone countered with "What about the Lesbians?"  I did feel compelled to grant him that point, especially on the basis of certain passages in the Quintet. 

Anne

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "James Gifford" <james.d.gifford at gmail.com>
To: <ilds at lists.uvic.ca>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2011 2:57 AM
Subject: Re: [ilds] thank you


> Hi Rony,
> 
> It's worth noting that many of Durrell's ms./ts. letters at various 
> archives relate to books lent but not returned, in particular books lent 
> to Alf Perl?s (and probably sold by him)...  My guess is that LD had the 
> 1954 Freud/Fliess, lent and/or lost it, then reacquired the 1960 prior 
> to the release of the Quartet as a whole.  He certainly had it in one 
> form or another, and perhaps one of the English translations will match 
> the epigram (I still think the 1954 does, but I don't have it ready to 
> hand).  Durrell's annotated Groddeck volumes had legs too, walking off 
> to all and sundry.
> 
> I'm quite sure Michael Haag had noted on this listerv that the 
> censorship of the "bisexuality" from the epigram was Faber's work, not 
> Durrell's, and the same occurred for the "modern love," which was 
> originally "bisexual love."  Keeping those two points in mind from the 
> epigram and the "investigation of modern love" certainly revises the 
> nature of the Quartet significantly.  In the opening pages, Cavafy and 
> Balthazar go looking of the young boys, and then the anonymous Darley 
> and his ungendered and unnamed lover go walking about for several 
> sentences before she is finally revealed as female and subsequently as 
> Melissa.
> 
> For LD's works, the openness to various forms of sexualities seems to be 
> present from /Pied Piper/ forward, despite the homophobic jokes in /The 
> Black Book/ (there's still a very good deal of privileging some kind of 
> fluidity in sexual identity in that book as well as some intriguing 
> notions of discovering sexuality over time).  I think the ideas 
> solidified around notions of subjectivity just after the Quartet, hence 
> the peculiarities about identify in /Revolt/ and later in the /Quintet/.
> 
> If you dig anything up on the 1954 copy, please let us know.  I 
> photocopied it somewhere during my graduate work, but I think it's all 
> in a storage locker now...  I'm sure the rest of the list would be 
> interested in whatever you uncover.
> 
> Best,
> James
> 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20110321/2174c5a0/attachment.html 

From bredwine1968 at earthlink.net  Mon Mar 21 08:58:35 2011
From: bredwine1968 at earthlink.net (Bruce Redwine)
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2011 08:58:35 -0700
Subject: [ilds] Bisexuality and Beyond
In-Reply-To: <D4CDB7D2FE254BE88ABE82D00AA2B92B@annezahlan1>
References: <AANLkTinUSMGgG9aJLwuOx-29V51BNN4WOoyfr_ESDxEf@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D86F6BD.7000903@gmail.com>
	<D4CDB7D2FE254BE88ABE82D00AA2B92B@annezahlan1>
Message-ID: <98FAE766-6294-45E6-86FF-7753910D3B77@earthlink.net>

Which passages in the Quintet?  I don't sense this in the Quartet.  Has Durrell changed his attitude?  Seems unlikely.  If so, why?


Bruce


Sent from my iPhone

On Mar 21, 2011, at 8:40 AM, "Anne R Zahlan" <zahlan at earthlink.net> wrote:

> I do agree with James that Durrell privileges "fluidity in sexual identity" and with what I would take as corollary that Durrell did not condemn homosexuality or homosexuals--Scobie is arguably the Quartet's most delightful character. However, this discussion somehow reminded me of a conversation I had with Joseph Boone (of "Queering the Quartet") on the streets of Alexandria.  When I argued against the notion of homophobic elements in Durrell, Boone countered with "What about the Lesbians?"  I did feel compelled to grant him that point, especially on the basis of certain passages in the Quintet. 
>  
> Anne
>  
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "James Gifford" <james.d.gifford at gmail.com>
> To: <ilds at lists.uvic.ca>
> Sent: Monday, March 21, 2011 2:57 AM
> Subject: Re: [ilds] thank you
> 
> > Hi Rony,
> > 
> > It's worth noting that many of Durrell's ms./ts. letters at various 
> > archives relate to books lent but not returned, in particular books lent 
> > to Alf Perl?s (and probably sold by him)...  My guess is that LD had the 
> > 1954 Freud/Fliess, lent and/or lost it, then reacquired the 1960 prior 
> > to the release of the Quartet as a whole.  He certainly had it in one 
> > form or another, and perhaps one of the English translations will match 
> > the epigram (I still think the 1954 does, but I don't have it ready to 
> > hand).  Durrell's annotated Groddeck volumes had legs too, walking off 
> > to all and sundry.
> > 
> > I'm quite sure Michael Haag had noted on this listerv that the 
> > censorship of the "bisexuality" from the epigram was Faber's work, not 
> > Durrell's, and the same occurred for the "modern love," which was 
> > originally "bisexual love."  Keeping those two points in mind from the 
> > epigram and the "investigation of modern love" certainly revises the 
> > nature of the Quartet significantly.  In the  opening pages, Cavafy and 
> > Balthazar go looking of the young boys, and then the anonymous Darley 
> > and his ungendered and unnamed lover go walking about for several 
> > sentences before she is finally revealed as female and subsequently as 
> > Melissa.
> > 
> > For LD's works, the openness to various forms of sexualities seems to be 
> > present from /Pied Piper/ forward, despite the homophobic jokes in /The 
> > Black Book/ (there's still a very good deal of privileging some kind of 
> > fluidity in sexual identity in that book as well as some intriguing 
> > notions of discovering sexuality over time).  I think the ideas 
> > solidified around notions of subjectivity just after the Quartet, hence 
> > the peculiarities about identify in /Revolt/ and later in the /Quintet/.
> > 
> > If you dig anything up on the 1954 copy, please let us know.  I 
> > photocopied it somewhere during my graduate work, but I think it's all 
> > in a storage locker now...  I'm sure the rest of the list would be 
> > interested in whatever you uncover.
> > 
> > Best,
> > James
> > 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20110321/8a8d522c/attachment.html 

From rpinecorfu at yahoo.com  Mon Mar 21 09:13:03 2011
From: rpinecorfu at yahoo.com (Richard Pine)
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2011 09:13:03 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [ilds] Bisexuality and Beyond
In-Reply-To: <D4CDB7D2FE254BE88ABE82D00AA2B92B@annezahlan1>
References: <AANLkTinUSMGgG9aJLwuOx-29V51BNN4WOoyfr_ESDxEf@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D86F6BD.7000903@gmail.com>
	<D4CDB7D2FE254BE88ABE82D00AA2B92B@annezahlan1>
Message-ID: <263215.51549.qm@web65808.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>

In conversation with myself, LD did say that Scobie was one of?the characters 
for whom he had the greatest affection. RP




________________________________
From: Anne R Zahlan <zahlan at earthlink.net>
To: gifford at fdu.edu; ilds at lists.uvic.ca
Sent: Mon, March 21, 2011 5:40:36 PM
Subject: [ilds] Bisexuality and Beyond

? 
I do?agree with James that Durrell privileges "fluidity in?sexual identity" and 
with what I would take as corollary that Durrell did not condemn homosexuality 
or homosexuals--Scobie is arguably?the Quartet's most delightful character. 
However, this discussion somehow reminded me?of a conversation I had with Joseph 
Boone (of "Queering the Quartet") on the streets of Alexandria.? When I argued 
against the notion of homophobic elements in Durrell, Boone countered with "What 
about the Lesbians?"? I did feel compelled to grant him that point, especially 
on the basis of?certain passages in the Quintet.?
?
Anne
?
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "James Gifford" <james.d.gifford at gmail.com>
To: <ilds at lists.uvic.ca>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2011 2:57 AM
Subject: Re: [ilds] thank you
> Hi Rony,
> 
> It's worth noting that many of Durrell's ms./ts. letters at various 
> archives relate to books lent but not returned, in particular books lent 
> to Alf Perl?s (and probably sold by him)...? My guess is that LD had the 
> 1954 Freud/Fliess, lent and/or lost it, then reacquired the 1960 prior 
> to the release of the Quartet as a whole.? He certainly had it in one 
> form or another, and perhaps one of the English translations will match 
> the epigram (I still think the 1954 does, but I don't have it ready to 
> hand).? Durrell's annotated Groddeck volumes had legs too, walking off 
> to all and sundry.
> 
> I'm quite sure Michael Haag had noted on this listerv that the 
> censorship of the "bisexuality" from the epigram was Faber's work, not 
> Durrell's, and the same occurred for the "modern love," which was 
> originally "bisexual love."? Keeping those two points in mind from the 
> epigram and the "investigation of modern love" certainly revises the 
> nature of the Quartet significantly.? In the opening pages, Cavafy and 
> Balthazar go looking of the young boys, and then the anonymous Darley 
> and his ungendered and unnamed lover go walking about for several 
> sentences before she is finally revealed as female and subsequently as 
> Melissa.
> 
> For LD's works, the openness to various forms of sexualities seems to be 
> present from /Pied Piper/ forward, despite the homophobic jokes in /The 
> Black Book/ (there's still a very good deal of privileging some kind of 
> fluidity in sexual identity in that book as well as some intriguing 
> notions of discovering sexuality over time).? I think the ideas 
> solidified around notions of subjectivity just after the Quartet, hence 
> the peculiarities about identify in /Revolt/ and later in the /Quintet/.
> 
> If you dig anything up on the 1954 copy, please let us know.? I 
> photocopied it somewhere during my graduate work, but I think it's all 
> in a storage locker now...? I'm sure the rest of the list would be 
> interested in whatever you uncover.
> 
> Best,
> James
> 



      
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20110321/c410bfe5/attachment.html 

From zahlan at earthlink.net  Mon Mar 21 09:26:06 2011
From: zahlan at earthlink.net (Anne R Zahlan)
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2011 12:26:06 -0400
Subject: [ilds] Bisexuality and Beyond
References: <AANLkTinUSMGgG9aJLwuOx-29V51BNN4WOoyfr_ESDxEf@mail.gmail.com><4D86F6BD.7000903@gmail.com><D4CDB7D2FE254BE88ABE82D00AA2B92B@annezahlan1>
	<98FAE766-6294-45E6-86FF-7753910D3B77@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <6498DB626E1B445585E138356493978A@annezahlan1>

You could look at, for example, pages 300-302 of Monsieur (Blanford's views, countered somewhat by Tu), and then there's the characterization of Livia throughout the Quintet.  I especially like this observation: "'In the powder rooms of the world's great hotels when male lesbians meet they show each other their wedding rings and burst out laughing'" (M301).



rom: Bruce Redwine 

  To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca 
  Cc: Bruce Redwine 
  Sent: Monday, March 21, 2011 11:58 AM
  Subject: Re: [ilds] Bisexuality and Beyond


  Which passages in the Quintet?  I don't sense this in the Quartet.  Has Durrell changed his attitude?  Seems unlikely.  If so, why?




  Bruce


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20110321/2be8ea22/attachment.html 

From bredwine1968 at earthlink.net  Mon Mar 21 11:20:25 2011
From: bredwine1968 at earthlink.net (Bruce Redwine)
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2011 11:20:25 -0700
Subject: [ilds] Bisexuality and Beyond
In-Reply-To: <6498DB626E1B445585E138356493978A@annezahlan1>
References: <AANLkTinUSMGgG9aJLwuOx-29V51BNN4WOoyfr_ESDxEf@mail.gmail.com><4D86F6BD.7000903@gmail.com><D4CDB7D2FE254BE88ABE82D00AA2B92B@annezahlan1>
	<98FAE766-6294-45E6-86FF-7753910D3B77@earthlink.net>
	<6498DB626E1B445585E138356493978A@annezahlan1>
Message-ID: <FEA98552-EB4F-45EF-AB7E-18C0BE8D4847@earthlink.net>

Anne,

I tend to disagree with Joseph Boone about Durrell having negative views towards Lesbians.  The quip below I would treat as one character's off-color humor and not as the view of M. Durrell himself, obviously.  The full characterization of Livia, however, is another matter, and since I haven't gone beyond Monsieur (a novel I've read twice and still can't hold in memory), I can't comment.  Maybe someone else can and elaborate.

Re off-color humor and what is considered "pc" or not, I allow an author a great deal of latitude, within limits.  E.g., Ezra Pound's and T. S. Eliot's anti-Semitism is not excusable, even though somewhat fashionable for the period in which they wrote.

Re an "investigation of modern [bisexuality]," I just finished a reading of Martial and am once again struck at the very great difference in Classical and modern notions of love and sexuality.  I assume that Durrell knew his Catullus, Horace, and Martial and that he too favored the Classical attitude, which allowed, with some restrictions, for all kinds of sexual activity between the "five sexes."  Maybe this position is what Durrell was striving for, souped up with Freudian theory and a dash of Stekel.  For a long time, I thought LGD may have been gay, but this was apparently not so, as Michael Haag once mentioned.  (Although that cover photo of MacNiven's Durrell-Miller Letters [1988] creates doubt, no?)  I say "apparently" because, as in the case of Kenneth S. Lynn's discovery of macho Hemingway's questionable sexuality (Hemingway [1987]), one can always expect surprises.  Could Durrell have been a suppressed bisexual?  Why his great interest in this topic?  Was he just picking up where DHL left off?  Where there's smoke, there's fire?  Interesting questions.

Martial clearly was bisexual, if such is the right term for the sexual license of his day.  His epigrams are satiric, irreverent, and no-holds-barred comments on the society of his day ? with a strong emphasis on sexuality.   Durrell sometimes engages in this activity, prankish or not, which may make him unacceptable to some in the gay community.


Bruce





On Mar 21, 2011, at 9:26 AM, Anne R Zahlan wrote:

> You could look at, for example, pages 300-302 of Monsieur (Blanford's views, countered somewhat by Tu), and then there's the characterization of Livia throughout theQuintet.  I especially like this observation: "'In the powder rooms of the world's great hotels when male lesbians meet they show each other their wedding rings and burst out laughing'" (M301).
>  
> rom: Bruce Redwine
> To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca
> Cc: Bruce Redwine
> Sent: Monday, March 21, 2011 11:58 AM
> Subject: Re: [ilds] Bisexuality and Beyond
> 
> Which passages in the Quintet?  I don't sense this in the Quartet.  Has Durrell changed his attitude?  Seems unlikely.  If so, why?
> 
> 
> Bruce
> 
> 
>  
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20110321/0a253c2e/attachment.html 

From dtart at bigpond.net.au  Mon Mar 21 12:56:32 2011
From: dtart at bigpond.net.au (Denise Tart & David Green)
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2011 06:56:32 +1100
Subject: [ilds] Bisexuality and Beyond
In-Reply-To: <FEA98552-EB4F-45EF-AB7E-18C0BE8D4847@earthlink.net>
References: <AANLkTinUSMGgG9aJLwuOx-29V51BNN4WOoyfr_ESDxEf@mail.gmail.com><4D86F6BD.7000903@gmail.com><D4CDB7D2FE254BE88ABE82D00AA2B92B@annezahlan1><98FAE766-6294-45E6-86FF-7753910D3B77@earthlink.net><6498DB626E1B445585E138356493978A@annezahlan1>
	<FEA98552-EB4F-45EF-AB7E-18C0BE8D4847@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <F6B1205C3A9A49B4BBC3E2EEA17D4379@DenisePC>

Durrell sometimes engages in this activity, prankish or not, which may make him unacceptable to some in the gay community.

Bruce, and others,

Considering his intention to write 'upper class porn' LGD's 'exploration of modern love' and consequent embrace of the five sexes, as it were, was clearly intended to shock, or at least be controversial. at the time of writing, given the prevailing morality of the time (late 50s), the quartet could have been banned. certainly it was considered risque in my country. Actually I dont think the censors got it so it went through to the keeper (or backstop as you Americans might say) and a craze for Justine bloomed amongst the smart set.
As to Durrell's own sexuality, despite the sometimes charge of misogyny (which may stem from suppressed homosexuality), he comes across biographically speaking as very much the hard drinking hetero. in his own texts, especially the more personal narratives, there is a clear affection for certain male characters but I detect nothing of the homo eroticism that one finds say, in Robert Dessaix who is as camp as a row of frilly tents, to coin a phrase, and doesn't mind you knowing it.

David


From: Bruce Redwine 
Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2011 5:20 AM
To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca 
Cc: Bruce Redwine 
Subject: Re: [ilds] Bisexuality and Beyond


Anne, 


I tend to disagree with Joseph Boone about Durrell having negative views towards Lesbians.  The quip below I would treat as one character's off-color humor and not as the view of M. Durrell himself, obviously.  The full characterization of Livia, however, is another matter, and since I haven't gone beyond Monsieur (a novel I've read twice and still can't hold in memory), I can't comment.  Maybe someone else can and elaborate. 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20110322/59fc1bdc/attachment.html 

From bredwine1968 at earthlink.net  Mon Mar 21 14:42:40 2011
From: bredwine1968 at earthlink.net (Bruce Redwine)
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2011 14:42:40 -0700
Subject: [ilds] Bisexuality and Beyond
In-Reply-To: <F6B1205C3A9A49B4BBC3E2EEA17D4379@DenisePC>
References: <AANLkTinUSMGgG9aJLwuOx-29V51BNN4WOoyfr_ESDxEf@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D86F6BD.7000903@gmail.com>
	<D4CDB7D2FE254BE88ABE82D00AA2B92B@annezahlan1>
	<98FAE766-6294-45E6-86FF-7753910D3B77@earthlink.net>
	<6498DB626E1B445585E138356493978A@annezahlan1>
	<FEA98552-EB4F-45EF-AB7E-18C0BE8D4847@earthlink.net>
	<F6B1205C3A9A49B4BBC3E2EEA17D4379@DenisePC>
Message-ID: <78C5D7A0-7BEB-4709-80AE-E2762A2C5D36@earthlink.net>

David,

Sex will definitely sell books and get people talking, as we're doing now.  LGD was following in the wake of Mailer's "The Time of Her Time" and Nabokov's Lolita.  I take Durrell at his word about an "investigation of modern bisexuality," however.  I think he thought he was doing something important, if not new.  I would also emphasize the word "modern" in his program, i.e., in the sense of updating what had once been acceptable and commonplace.  Had Martial made such a claim to his Latin audience, the Romans would have surely laughed at his triteness.

I'm beginning to think Durrell was, at some level, a suppressed homosexual.


Bruce



Sent from my iPhone

On Mar 21, 2011, at 12:56 PM, "Denise Tart & David Green" <dtart at bigpond.net.au> wrote:

> Durrell sometimes engages in this activity, prankish or not, which may make him unacceptable to some in the gay community.
>  
> Bruce, and others,
>  
> Considering his intention to write 'upper class porn' LGD's 'exploration of modern love' and consequent embrace of the five sexes, as it were, was clearly intended to shock, or at least be controversial. at the time of writing, given the prevailing morality of the time (late 50s), the quartet could have been banned. certainly it was considered risque in my country. Actually I dont think the censors got it so it went through to the keeper (or backstop as you Americans might say) and a craze for Justine bloomed  amongst the smart set.
> As to Durrell's own sexuality, despite the sometimes charge of misogyny (which may stem from suppressed homosexuality), he comes across biographically speaking as very much the hard drinking hetero. in his own texts, especially the more personal narratives, there is a clear affection for certain male characters but I detect nothing of the homo eroticism that one finds say, in Robert Dessaix who is as camp as a row of frilly tents, to coin a phrase, and doesn't mind you knowing it.
>  
> David
> 
> From: Bruce Redwine
> Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2011 5:20 AM
> To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca
> Cc: Bruce Redwine
> Subject: Re: [ilds] Bisexuality and Beyond
> 
> Anne,
> 
> I tend to disagree with Joseph Boone about Durrell having negative views towards Lesbians.  The quip below I would treat as one character's off-color humor and not as the view of M. Durrell himself, obviously.  The full characterization of Livia, however, is another matter, and since I haven't gone beyond Monsieur (a novel I've read twice and still can't hold in memory), I can't comment.  Maybe someone else can and elaborate.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20110321/37fb828b/attachment.html 

From marcpiel at interdesign.fr  Mon Mar 21 14:43:12 2011
From: marcpiel at interdesign.fr (Marc Piel)
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2011 22:43:12 +0100
Subject: [ilds] Wasp....
Message-ID: <4D87C670.2000802@interdesign.fr>

Surely a lot of the recent remarks about sexuality 
are very waspish?!!! I didn't realise that this 
attitude still existed in America, but appreently 
it is still quite strong. Explains a lot!
B.R.
Marc

From marcpiel at interdesign.fr  Mon Mar 21 15:44:04 2011
From: marcpiel at interdesign.fr (Marc Piel)
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2011 23:44:04 +0100
Subject: [ilds] Bisexuality and Beyond
In-Reply-To: <78C5D7A0-7BEB-4709-80AE-E2762A2C5D36@earthlink.net>
References: <AANLkTinUSMGgG9aJLwuOx-29V51BNN4WOoyfr_ESDxEf@mail.gmail.com>	<4D86F6BD.7000903@gmail.com>	<D4CDB7D2FE254BE88ABE82D00AA2B92B@annezahlan1>	<98FAE766-6294-45E6-86FF-7753910D3B77@earthlink.net>	<6498DB626E1B445585E138356493978A@annezahlan1>	<FEA98552-EB4F-45EF-AB7E-18C0BE8D4847@earthlink.net>	<F6B1205C3A9A49B4BBC3E2EEA17D4379@DenisePC>
	<78C5D7A0-7BEB-4709-80AE-E2762A2C5D36@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <4D87D4B4.2040003@interdesign.fr>

Surely it has been advanced that we ALL have a bit 
of homosexuality in us? ALL!
B.R.
Marc

Le 21/03/11 22:42, Bruce Redwine a ?crit :
> David,
>
> Sex will definitely sell books and get people talking, as we're doing
> now. LGD was following in the wake of Mailer's "The Time of Her Time"
> and Nabokov's Lolita. I take Durrell at his word about an "investigation
> of modern bisexuality," however. I think he thought he was doing
> something important, if not new. I would also emphasize the word
> "modern" in his program, i.e., in the sense of updating what had once
> been acceptable and commonplace. Had Martial made such a claim to his
> Latin audience, the Romans would have surely laughed at his triteness.
>
> I'm beginning to think Durrell was, at some level, a suppressed homosexual.
>
>
> Bruce
>
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Mar 21, 2011, at 12:56 PM, "Denise Tart & David Green"
> <dtart at bigpond.net.au <mailto:dtart at bigpond.net.au>> wrote:
>
>> Durrell sometimes engages in this activity, prankish or not, which may
>> make him unacceptable to some in the gay community.
>> Bruce, and others,
>> Considering his intention to write 'upper class porn' LGD's
>> 'exploration of modern love' and consequent embrace of the five sexes,
>> as it were, was clearly intended to shock, or at least be
>> controversial. at the time of writing, given the prevailing morality
>> of the time (late 50s), the quartet could have been banned. certainly
>> it was considered risque in my country. Actually I dont think the
>> censors got it so it went through to the keeper (or backstop as you
>> Americans might say) and a craze for Justine bloomed amongst the smart
>> set.
>> As to Durrell's own sexuality, despite the sometimes charge of
>> misogyny (which may stem from suppressed homosexuality), he comes
>> across biographically speaking as very much the hard drinking hetero.
>> in his own texts, especially the more personal narratives, there is a
>> clear affection for certain male characters but I detect nothing of
>> the homo eroticism that one finds say, in Robert Dessaix who is as
>> camp as a row of frilly tents, to coin a phrase, and doesn't mind you
>> knowing it.
>> David
>>
>> *From:* Bruce Redwine <mailto:bredwine1968 at earthlink.net>
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, March 22, 2011 5:20 AM
>> *To:* <mailto:ilds at lists.uvic.ca>ilds at lists.uvic.ca
>> <mailto:ilds at lists.uvic.ca>
>> *Cc:* Bruce Redwine <mailto:bredwine1968 at earthlink.net>
>> *Subject:* Re: [ilds] Bisexuality and Beyond
>>
>> Anne,
>>
>> I tend to disagree with Joseph Boone about Durrell having negative
>> views towards Lesbians. The quip below I would treat as one
>> character's off-color humor and not as the view of M. Durrell himself,
>> obviously. The full characterization of Livia, however, is another
>> matter, and since I haven't gone beyond /Monsieur /(a novel I've read
>> twice and still can't hold in memory), I can't comment. Maybe someone
>> else can and elaborate.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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

From william.godshalk at gmail.com  Mon Mar 21 18:14:57 2011
From: william.godshalk at gmail.com (William Godshalk)
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2011 21:14:57 -0400
Subject: [ilds] Bisexuality and Beyond
In-Reply-To: <4D87D4B4.2040003@interdesign.fr>
References: <AANLkTinUSMGgG9aJLwuOx-29V51BNN4WOoyfr_ESDxEf@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D86F6BD.7000903@gmail.com>
	<D4CDB7D2FE254BE88ABE82D00AA2B92B@annezahlan1>
	<98FAE766-6294-45E6-86FF-7753910D3B77@earthlink.net>
	<6498DB626E1B445585E138356493978A@annezahlan1>
	<FEA98552-EB4F-45EF-AB7E-18C0BE8D4847@earthlink.net>
	<F6B1205C3A9A49B4BBC3E2EEA17D4379@DenisePC>
	<78C5D7A0-7BEB-4709-80AE-E2762A2C5D36@earthlink.net>
	<4D87D4B4.2040003@interdesign.fr>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikJ8JpGt3jfRtmPwfqeqOYRtyZB6U1cbTkP17Vf@mail.gmail.com>

Well, if Durrell was gay, he really did a good job convincing those who were
with him that he was straight. At Penn State he came on strong to the
undergrad chics -- holding their hands, kissing them. Of course, when I was
not around, I know not what he did.

Bill

On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 6:44 PM, Marc Piel <marcpiel at interdesign.fr> wrote:

> Surely it has been advanced that we ALL have a bit
> of homosexuality in us? ALL!
> B.R.
> Marc
>
> Le 21/03/11 22:42, Bruce Redwine a ?crit :
> > David,
> >
> > Sex will definitely sell books and get people talking, as we're doing
> > now. LGD was following in the wake of Mailer's "The Time of Her Time"
> > and Nabokov's Lolita. I take Durrell at his word about an "investigation
> > of modern bisexuality," however. I think he thought he was doing
> > something important, if not new. I would also emphasize the word
> > "modern" in his program, i.e., in the sense of updating what had once
> > been acceptable and commonplace. Had Martial made such a claim to his
> > Latin audience, the Romans would have surely laughed at his triteness.
> >
> > I'm beginning to think Durrell was, at some level, a suppressed
> homosexual.
> >
> >
> > Bruce
> >
> >
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> > On Mar 21, 2011, at 12:56 PM, "Denise Tart & David Green"
> > <dtart at bigpond.net.au <mailto:dtart at bigpond.net.au>> wrote:
> >
> >> Durrell sometimes engages in this activity, prankish or not, which may
> >> make him unacceptable to some in the gay community.
> >> Bruce, and others,
> >> Considering his intention to write 'upper class porn' LGD's
> >> 'exploration of modern love' and consequent embrace of the five sexes,
> >> as it were, was clearly intended to shock, or at least be
> >> controversial. at the time of writing, given the prevailing morality
> >> of the time (late 50s), the quartet could have been banned. certainly
> >> it was considered risque in my country. Actually I dont think the
> >> censors got it so it went through to the keeper (or backstop as you
> >> Americans might say) and a craze for Justine bloomed amongst the smart
> >> set.
> >> As to Durrell's own sexuality, despite the sometimes charge of
> >> misogyny (which may stem from suppressed homosexuality), he comes
> >> across biographically speaking as very much the hard drinking hetero.
> >> in his own texts, especially the more personal narratives, there is a
> >> clear affection for certain male characters but I detect nothing of
> >> the homo eroticism that one finds say, in Robert Dessaix who is as
> >> camp as a row of frilly tents, to coin a phrase, and doesn't mind you
> >> knowing it.
> >> David
> >>
> >> *From:* Bruce Redwine <mailto:bredwine1968 at earthlink.net>
> >> *Sent:* Tuesday, March 22, 2011 5:20 AM
> >> *To:* <mailto:ilds at lists.uvic.ca>ilds at lists.uvic.ca
> >> <mailto:ilds at lists.uvic.ca>
> >> *Cc:* Bruce Redwine <mailto:bredwine1968 at earthlink.net>
> >> *Subject:* Re: [ilds] Bisexuality and Beyond
> >>
> >> Anne,
> >>
> >> I tend to disagree with Joseph Boone about Durrell having negative
> >> views towards Lesbians. The quip below I would treat as one
> >> character's off-color humor and not as the view of M. Durrell himself,
> >> obviously. The full characterization of Livia, however, is another
> >> matter, and since I haven't gone beyond /Monsieur /(a novel I've read
> >> twice and still can't hold in memory), I can't comment. Maybe someone
> >> else can and elaborate.
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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
>



-- 
W. L. Godshalk                 *
Department of English *           *      *
University of Cincinnati    *     stellar disorder *
OH 45221-0069     *               *          *
godshawl at ucmail.uc.edu
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20110321/40494ef7/attachment.html 

From bredwine1968 at earthlink.net  Mon Mar 21 18:57:29 2011
From: bredwine1968 at earthlink.net (Bruce Redwine)
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2011 18:57:29 -0700
Subject: [ilds] Bisexuality and Beyond
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikJ8JpGt3jfRtmPwfqeqOYRtyZB6U1cbTkP17Vf@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTinUSMGgG9aJLwuOx-29V51BNN4WOoyfr_ESDxEf@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D86F6BD.7000903@gmail.com>
	<D4CDB7D2FE254BE88ABE82D00AA2B92B@annezahlan1>
	<98FAE766-6294-45E6-86FF-7753910D3B77@earthlink.net>
	<6498DB626E1B445585E138356493978A@annezahlan1>
	<FEA98552-EB4F-45EF-AB7E-18C0BE8D4847@earthlink.net>
	<F6B1205C3A9A49B4BBC3E2EEA17D4379@DenisePC>
	<78C5D7A0-7BEB-4709-80AE-E2762A2C5D36@earthlink.net>
	<4D87D4B4.2040003@interdesign.fr>
	<AANLkTikJ8JpGt3jfRtmPwfqeqOYRtyZB6U1cbTkP17Vf@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <30D8E023-28B8-4F8C-95AA-516080FB7066@earthlink.net>

And so did papa Hemingway convince everyone that he was a man's man.

Bruce


Sent from my iPhone

On Mar 21, 2011, at 6:14 PM, William Godshalk <william.godshalk at gmail.com> wrote:

> Well, if Durrell was gay, he really did a good job convincing those who were with him that he was straight. At Penn State he came on strong to the undergrad chics -- holding their hands, kissing them. Of course, when I was not around, I know not what he did. 
> 
> Bill 
> 
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 6:44 PM, Marc Piel <marcpiel at interdesign.fr> wrote:
> Surely it has been advanced that we ALL have a bit
> of homosexuality in us? ALL!
> B.R.
> Marc
> 
> Le 21/03/11 22:42, Bruce Redwine a ?crit :
> > David,
> >
> > Sex will definitely sell books and get people talking, as we're doing
> > now. LGD was following in the wake of Mailer's "The Time of Her Time"
> > and Nabokov's Lolita. I take Durrell at his word about an "investigation
> > of modern bisexuality," however. I think he thought he was doing
> > something important, if not new. I would also emphasize the word
> > "modern" in his program, i.e., in the sense of updating what had once
> > been acceptable and commonplace. Had Martial made such a claim to his
> > Latin audience, the Romans would have surely laughed at his triteness.
> >
> > I'm beginning to think Durrell was, at some level, a suppressed homosexual.
> >
> >
> > Bruce
> >
> >
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> > On Mar 21, 2011, at 12:56 PM, "Denise Tart & David Green"
> > <dtart at bigpond.net.au <mailto:dtart at bigpond.net.au>> wrote:
> >
> >> Durrell sometimes engages in this activity, prankish or not, which may
> >> make him unacceptable to some in the gay community.
> >> Bruce, and others,
> >> Considering his intention to write 'upper class porn' LGD's
> >> 'exploration of modern love' and consequent embrace of the five sexes,
> >> as it were, was clearly intended to shock, or at least be
> >> controversial. at the time of writing, given the prevailing morality
> >> of the time (late 50s), the quartet could have been banned. certainly
> >> it was considered risque in my country. Actually I dont think the
> >> censors got it so it went through to the keeper (or backstop as you
> >> Americans might say) and a craze for Justine bloomed amongst the smart
> >> set.
> >> As to Durrell's own sexuality, despite the sometimes charge of
> >> misogyny (which may stem from suppressed homosexuality), he comes
> >> across biographically speaking as very much the hard drinking hetero.
> >> in his own texts, especially the more personal narratives, there is a
> >> clear affection for certain male characters but I detect nothing of
> >> the homo eroticism that one finds say, in Robert Dessaix who is as
> >> camp as a row of frilly tents, to coin a phrase, and doesn't mind you
> >> knowing it.
> >> David
> >>
> >> *From:* Bruce Redwine <mailto:bredwine1968 at earthlink.net>
> >> *Sent:* Tuesday, March 22, 2011 5:20 AM
> >> *To:* <mailto:ilds at lists.uvic.ca>ilds at lists.uvic.ca
> >> <mailto:ilds at lists.uvic.ca>
> >> *Cc:* Bruce Redwine <mailto:bredwine1968 at earthlink.net>
> >> *Subject:* Re: [ilds] Bisexuality and Beyond
> >>
> >> Anne,
> >>
> >> I tend to disagree with Joseph Boone about Durrell having negative
> >> views towards Lesbians. The quip below I would treat as one
> >> character's off-color humor and not as the view of M. Durrell himself,
> >> obviously. The full characterization of Livia, however, is another
> >> matter, and since I haven't gone beyond /Monsieur /(a novel I've read
> >> twice and still can't hold in memory), I can't comment. Maybe someone
> >> else can and elaborate.
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> W. L. Godshalk                 *
> Department of English *           *      *
> University of Cincinnati    *     stellar disorder *
> OH 45221-0069     *               *          *
> godshawl at ucmail.uc.edu  
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ILDS mailing list
> ILDS at lists.uvic.ca
> https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20110321/3387739e/attachment.html 

From james.d.gifford at gmail.com  Tue Mar 22 00:57:24 2011
From: james.d.gifford at gmail.com (James Gifford)
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2011 00:57:24 -0700
Subject: [ilds] Bisexuality and Beyond
In-Reply-To: <6498DB626E1B445585E138356493978A@annezahlan1>
References: <AANLkTinUSMGgG9aJLwuOx-29V51BNN4WOoyfr_ESDxEf@mail.gmail.com><4D86F6BD.7000903@gmail.com><D4CDB7D2FE254BE88ABE82D00AA2B92B@annezahlan1>	<98FAE766-6294-45E6-86FF-7753910D3B77@earthlink.net>
	<6498DB626E1B445585E138356493978A@annezahlan1>
Message-ID: <4D885664.2020001@gmail.com>

Nice comments, Anne, and it's good to have you in the conversation. 
Where did your article appear?  Is it the one on "The Black Body" in 
/South Atlantic Review/?

I'd agree that there's a difference in how the lesbian figures in 
Durrell's later fiction, though I do think it's a shift from what we 
find in /Pied Piper of Lovers/:

----------->
Two young women, of unbelievable slimness, were locked in each other?s 
arms, trying to dance to one of the gramophones. They were so tightly 
wedged in that they found movement an impossibility, but they swayed 
from side to side, wagging their hips gently in time to the music, and 
intoning nasally:

      Love, you?re a peach,
      Want you to teach me
      Love as Love ought to be.

Their eyes were fast shut, as if they were dancing some insomniac dance 
of lethargy and utter exhaustion. ?Minnie and Kate,? said Isobel 
angrily. ?Why in hell can?t they do their erotic hell-dances in private. 
It?s indecent.?
      ?What isn?t?? said Robin. ?Live and let live.?
      ?Love and let love,? amended Walsh. (/Pied/ 219)
<-----------

The protagonist Walsh, who resembles Durrell quite a bit, very clearly 
had homosexual experiences as well.

As for Bruce's question about why a shift may have occurred, my own 
suspicion, which is probably different from Anne's, is that Durrell 
become more interested in BOTH shifting identities and destructive 
figures in his later fiction.  That said, Justine is destructive in ways 
kindred to Livia, so there is a longer timeframe involved.

For what it's worth, I'm attached a copy of a queer reading of Henry 
Miller, which also refers to Durrell.  The journal makes itself public 6 
months after publication, so I think I can send this to everyone without 
trampling on toes...

Best,
James

On 21/03/11 9:26 AM, Anne R Zahlan wrote:
> You could look at, for example, pages 300-302 of /Monsieur /(Blanford's
> views, countered somewhat by Tu),//and then there's the characterization
> of Livia throughout the /Quintet./ I especially like this observation:
> "'In the powder rooms of the world's great hotels when male lesbians
> meet they show each other their wedding rings and burst out laughing'"
> (M301).
>
> *rom:* Bruce Redwine <mailto:bredwine1968 at earthlink.net>
>
>     *To:* ilds at lists.uvic.ca <mailto:ilds at lists.uvic.ca>
>     *Cc:* Bruce Redwine <mailto:bredwine1968 at earthlink.net>
>     *Sent:* Monday, March 21, 2011 11:58 AM
>     *Subject:* Re: [ilds] Bisexuality and Beyond
>
>     Which passages in the Quintet? I don't sense this in the Quartet.
>     Has Durrell changed his attitude? Seems unlikely. If so, why?
>
>
>     Bruce


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Gifford-2.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 208320 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20110322/cb505aaf/attachment.pdf 

From dtart at bigpond.net.au  Tue Mar 22 07:33:45 2011
From: dtart at bigpond.net.au (Denise Tart & David Green)
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 01:33:45 +1100
Subject: [ilds] Wasp....
In-Reply-To: <4D87C670.2000802@interdesign.fr>
References: <4D87C670.2000802@interdesign.fr>
Message-ID: <9EE2A6D5B19E4BAC98779DFFE86B5F9A@DenisePC>

ah! my dear marc, don't be so sure of your judgment about us wasps. we Anglo 
Saxons, like the Germans have a long history of sexual deviancy and indeed 
kinkiness that I am sure the Latin world is well aware of. is it not Carla 
in Brideshead Revisited who comments on 'these friendships of the English 
and the Germans'. while it is implied that she is refering to deep soul 
love, certainly in the case of Hugh Lygon there was more to it - but then 
Lygon was catholic. I am also thinking of San Francisco and Sydney, not too 
mention Berlin or the fact that Herman Goering put nail polish on his toe 
nails. As for LD, he was definitely a sponge rather than a stone, a soaker 
up of experience, but we must be careful here; the creation of characters 
does necessarily reflect upon the preferences of the author which, as Bill 
as pointed out were decidedly towards the curvaceous forms of women, even if 
he did not always think much of them intellectually (Durrell Miller 
Letters). perhaps Bill can paint a picture of the old onion seller on a 
north American campus surrounded by adoring maidens....?

David lapsed protestant

--------------------------------------------------
From: "Marc Piel" <marcpiel at interdesign.fr>
Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2011 8:43 AM
To: "Durrell list" <ilds at lists.uvic.ca>
Subject: [ilds] Wasp....

> Surely a lot of the recent remarks about sexuality
> are very waspish?!!! I didn't realise that this
> attitude still existed in America, but appreently
> it is still quite strong. Explains a lot!
> B.R.
> Marc
> _______________________________________________
> ILDS mailing list
> ILDS at lists.uvic.ca
> https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds 


From zahlan at earthlink.net  Tue Mar 22 11:39:33 2011
From: zahlan at earthlink.net (Anne R Zahlan)
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2011 14:39:33 -0400
Subject: [ilds] Bisexuality and Beyond
References: <AANLkTinUSMGgG9aJLwuOx-29V51BNN4WOoyfr_ESDxEf@mail.gmail.com><4D86F6BD.7000903@gmail.com><D4CDB7D2FE254BE88ABE82D00AA2B92B@annezahlan1>	<98FAE766-6294-45E6-86FF-7753910D3B77@earthlink.net><6498DB626E1B445585E138356493978A@annezahlan1>
	<4D885664.2020001@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <2502938838F949E6A4D25B7ADFD0C0EB@annezahlan1>

yes

The topic was race but the Lesbian stuff came up.

Anne


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "James Gifford" <james.d.gifford at gmail.com>
To: <ilds at lists.uvic.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2011 3:57 AM
Subject: Re: [ilds] Bisexuality and Beyond


> Nice comments, Anne, and it's good to have you in the conversation.
> Where did your article appear?  Is it the one on "The Black Body" in
> /South Atlantic Review/?
>
> I'd agree that there's a difference in how the lesbian figures in
> Durrell's later fiction, though I do think it's a shift from what we
> find in /Pied Piper of Lovers/:
>
> ----------->
> Two young women, of unbelievable slimness, were locked in each other?s
> arms, trying to dance to one of the gramophones. They were so tightly
> wedged in that they found movement an impossibility, but they swayed
> from side to side, wagging their hips gently in time to the music, and
> intoning nasally:
>
>      Love, you?re a peach,
>      Want you to teach me
>      Love as Love ought to be.
>
> Their eyes were fast shut, as if they were dancing some insomniac dance
> of lethargy and utter exhaustion. ?Minnie and Kate,? said Isobel
> angrily. ?Why in hell can?t they do their erotic hell-dances in private.
> It?s indecent.?
>      ?What isn?t?? said Robin. ?Live and let live.?
>      ?Love and let love,? amended Walsh. (/Pied/ 219)
> <-----------
>
> The protagonist Walsh, who resembles Durrell quite a bit, very clearly
> had homosexual experiences as well.
>
> As for Bruce's question about why a shift may have occurred, my own
> suspicion, which is probably different from Anne's, is that Durrell
> become more interested in BOTH shifting identities and destructive
> figures in his later fiction.  That said, Justine is destructive in ways
> kindred to Livia, so there is a longer timeframe involved.
>
> For what it's worth, I'm attached a copy of a queer reading of Henry
> Miller, which also refers to Durrell.  The journal makes itself public 6
> months after publication, so I think I can send this to everyone without
> trampling on toes...
>
> Best,
> James
>
> On 21/03/11 9:26 AM, Anne R Zahlan wrote:
>> You could look at, for example, pages 300-302 of /Monsieur /(Blanford's
>> views, countered somewhat by Tu),//and then there's the characterization
>> of Livia throughout the /Quintet./ I especially like this observation:
>> "'In the powder rooms of the world's great hotels when male lesbians
>> meet they show each other their wedding rings and burst out laughing'"
>> (M301).
>>
>> *rom:* Bruce Redwine <mailto:bredwine1968 at earthlink.net>
>>
>>     *To:* ilds at lists.uvic.ca <mailto:ilds at lists.uvic.ca>
>>     *Cc:* Bruce Redwine <mailto:bredwine1968 at earthlink.net>
>>     *Sent:* Monday, March 21, 2011 11:58 AM
>>     *Subject:* Re: [ilds] Bisexuality and Beyond
>>
>>     Which passages in the Quintet? I don't sense this in the Quartet.
>>     Has Durrell changed his attitude? Seems unlikely. If so, why?
>>
>>
>>     Bruce
>
>
>


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


> _______________________________________________
> ILDS mailing list
> ILDS at lists.uvic.ca
> https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds
> 


From bredwine1968 at earthlink.net  Thu Mar 24 16:16:42 2011
From: bredwine1968 at earthlink.net (Bruce Redwine)
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 16:16:42 -0700
Subject: [ilds] Miller's "Numinous Cock" v. Durrell's "Man-Size Piece"
Message-ID: <4D20CF6B-5AEF-41BB-8329-10706B245436@earthlink.net>

Recent discussions on "bisexuality and beyond" have raised important questions about sexuality/bisexuality both in LGD's oeuvre and his personal life.  James Gifford's posted article ? "Reading Miller's 'Numinous Cock':  Heterosexist Presumption and Queerings of the Censored Text" ? provides new insights re Henry Miller's Tropic of Cancer (1934).  I shall extend these observations to Lawrence Durrell himself, which James does not do on this occasion.  His focus is different than mine.  I urge all to read James's very intriguing essay ? it's entirely worthwhile.

To set the scene, in terms of the sexual issues, I'll quote one of Martial's short epigrams, taken from the D. R. Shackleton Bailey's translation of the Epigrams in the Loeb Library, vol. II (Cambridge, Mass., 1993).  Martial lived from c. 40 - c. 104 AD.  I think it highly probable that LGD was familiar with him.  Durrell knew Horace (cf. his "On First Looking into Loeb's Horace"), who's much harder to translate.  Given Martial's subject matter and the beauty of his Latin, he's been a popular poet to translate from the Renaissance on.  The poet Peter Porter, one of Durrell's admirers, translated many of the poems.  So,

"Lascivam tota possedi nocte puellam,
  cuius nequitias vincere nemo potest.
fessus mille modis illud puerile poposci:
  ante preces totum primaque verba dedit.
improbius quiddam ridensque rubensque rogavi:
  pollicita est nulla luxuriosa mora.
sed mihi pura fuit; tibi non erit, Aeschyle, si vis
  accipere hoc munus condicione mala."


"All night long I enjoyed a wanton girl, whose naughtiness no man can exhaust.  Tired by a thousand different modes, I asked for the boy routine [illud puerile]; before I begged or started to beg, she gave it in full.  Laughing and blushing, I asked for something more indecent; the lustful hussy promised without hesitation.  But so far as I am concerned, she was undefiled; she won't be so far as you are concerned, Aeschylus, if you choose to accept this present on bad terms."

(IX. 67)

The poem is puzzling and deliberately provocative in the way that Martial likes to be.  His epigrams often end with a twist and then a slap in the face.  The "boy routine" (illud puerile) is a Latin euphemism for anal intercourse (see Peter Stothard in TLS, 26 January 2007).  Puer is Latin for a boy, one of Martial's favorite erotic interests, as well as for many older men in the Classical world.  In this episode, the girl (puellam) is being treated as a boy.  What is more "indecent" (improbius) is left to the imagination.  Today we would call illud puerile buggery and would label the puer a "punk" (American slang).  The Romans, like the Greeks, were quite open about such relationships and did not hold sodomy in opprobrium.  They did, however, make distinctions between active and passive roles, which corresponded to mature and adolescent males.  It was all right to be aggressive but disgraceful to be passive, if no longer a "youth" (see J. N. Adams on pedico, "bugger," in The Latin Sexual Vocabulary [Baltimore, 1982], 123-25).  The ancient Greeks made similar distinctions:  the submissive boy was the pais, the dominant male the erastes (the latter term is K. J. Dover's coinage; see his Greek Homosexuality [Cambridge, Mass., 1978], 16).

We know much about Classical immodesty, or whatever we wish to call it, when dealing with sex, both from the literature and from the art.  Greek vase painting is particularly revealing about numerous kinds of sexual acts and provides the evidence for many of Dover's comments.  I remember visiting Pompeii and going into the House of the Vettii, the villa of a wealthy family.  At the entrance was a painting of Priapus weighing his enormous penis against a sack of money.  Blatant pornography?  No, according to my guide, an art historian, that was the Roman way to wish prosperity on all who visit the house (see John R. Clarke, Looking at Lovemaking:  Constructions of Sexuality in Roman Art, 100 B.C. - A.D. 250 [Berkeley, 1998], 175, fig. 65).  The Pompeiians did not reserve sex for darkened bedrooms.

James Gifford takes the title of his essay from Gore Vidal's review of Ian MacNiven's edition of the Durrell-Miller Letters (1988).  I read the review many years ago and do not have access to it now.  Vidal begins his essay by commenting on the book's dust jacket, which has a 1939 photo of Miller and Durrell sitting on a Corfu beach, both completely naked.  Vidal describes Miller (who is almost bald, relaxed with legs extended and penis fully exposed, and looks directly into Nancy Durrell's lens) as having a "numinous cock."  A youthful Durrell hunches his shoulders, looks away from the camera, bends one leg up, and conceals his penis.  Vidal, if I recall correctly, describes Durrell as "elfin" ? who certainly appears shy, boyish, and, indeed, puerile.  Vidal was clearly fascinated by the photo ? and he should know homoeroticism when he sees it ? for the great author and critic is openly bisexual and frank about his proclivities and conquests.  In his memoir, Palimpsest (1995), he describes himself as a dominant male (see his depiction of a sexual encounter with Jack Kerouac, p. 233:  "I finally flipped him [Kerouac] over on his stomach . . . then he sighed as his head dropped back on the pillow.").  Vidal also knows Classical antiquity.  He wrote the novel Julian (1962), which deals with the Roman Emperor, Julian the Apostate.  I think Vidal saw something sexually familiar in Nancy's photo of the two friends and comrades in (literary) arms, but he did not go further, although his choice of Latinate "numinous" is suggestive of something strange and unusual happening in the scene.

I shall pursue the matter where Vidal left off.  So, remember the Greek setting and the erotic conventions of the fifth century B.C.  The 1939 photo resembles a scene on an ancient Greek vase where an erastes is in the company of his pais.  In 1974, thirty-five years later, Jill Krementz will take a photo of Miller and Durrell in bed together, presumably in Miller's home at Pacific Palisades, California (MacNiven, fig. 8).  This time the aged pair wear pajamas, are under bedcovers, and grin broadly at the camera.  The photo is obviously intended as a big joke.  But is it ? entirely?

Recall that in Durrell's famous letter to Miller, the one initiating their friendship and correspondence, the younger man says, "It [The Tropic of Cancer] strikes me as being the only really man-size piece of work which this century can really boast of" (August 1935; MacNiven, Letters, 2).  "Man-size piece" is an odd way to describe a novel.  "Boast" is also odd diction and reminds me of little boys who are fond of penile braggadocio ("Mine is bigger than yours").  Joseph A. Boone in his article, "Mappings of Male Desire in Durrell's Alexandria Quartet" (South Atlantic Quarterly 88 [1989], 75), calls Durrell's imagery "phallic."  I agree.  Moreover, the phallus is Miller's, as Durrell envisions it, or as he sees it in his erotic "mind's eye."

The roles that Miller and Durrell play and exchange over their long friendship do not neatly correspond to the erastes-pais paradigm.  I'm not claiming that the comparison is exact.  Later, as Durrell becomes successful, he will assume the dominant part.  Initially, however, the comparison is useful to consider.

Now, James in his essay justly emphasizes the homoerotic elements, often overlooked, in The Tropic of Cancer.  He analyzes in depth the scene where Miller penetrates or stimulates Van Norden's anus, as the latter is struggling to have intercourse with a female prostitute.  Van Norden struggles, and Miller is "tickling him in the rump" and dreaming of the former's penis (Tropic of Cancer [1961], 145).  Miller's use of the preposition in indicates digital penetration may have occurred.  What we have here is a form of buggery, which Martial would have well understood, perhaps as "improbius."  James concludes, "Stated bluntly, the only sexual penetration in the scene is Miller poking his finger in his friend's bum while dreaming of his friend's penis, which needs little critical intervention to reveal subversive, queer readings" (p. 7).  I fully agree.

James, however, doesn't explore the scene further and doesn't bring up other biographical associations, which he is undoubtedly aware of and perhaps saving for another essay.  The correspondences between fiction and life are rather obvious.  While on Corfu, Durrell reads The Tropic of Cancer, and, in homage to his hero Henry Miller, he names his cherished sailboat the Van Norden (Ian MacNiven, Lawrence Durrell:  A Biography [London 1998], 134).  Moreover, Durrell uses "Charles Norden" as a pseudonym for his novel Panic Spring (MacNiven, Lawrence Durrell, 116).  The issue of a pseudonym is not a minor consideration in LGD's development, and it takes the elder Miller to encourage the younger Durrell to wean himself from the dependency of "Charles Norden."  As Miller tells his friend, "The whole thing is a question of responsibility and willingness to accept one's fate . . . [I]n the end it will be L.D. who will be obliged to kill Charles Norden" (MacNiven, Letters, 85).  Another words, like a father or mentor, Miller is telling Durrell that it's time to grow up and be a man, and being "a man" involves a break or killing off some aspect of the past.

This evolving relationship, the progression from eroticism to mentorship, reminds me of those two lovers, Leila Hosnani and David Mountolive in Mountolive.  The older Leila loves and nurtures the much younger David, and their relationship eventually requires Leila's disfigurement, which may be taken as a death of some kind.  Is Leila Hosnani really Henry Miller in disguise?  So, the obvious question arises:  Does some part of Lawrence Durrell, conscious or not, so completely identify with Miller's fictional friend that he imagines or dreams of himself as having a homoerotic relationship with his hero?  I think so.  And that may account for Durrell's adulatory reference to Miller's "man-size piece" and provide a context for Vidal's use of "numinous."

Have I gone too far?  I don't think so.  I haven't done anything more than James has already done when he notes that the Obelisk Press edition of The Tropic of Cancer has as its logo the phallic symbol of an obelisk.  So, when readers handles the book, they are "unwittingly palming Miller's 'numinous cock'" (Gifford 1).  

Am I arguing that Durrell and Miller had a homosexual relationship?  No.  Am I arguing that Durrell was in fact homosexual?  No.  I am pointing out certain patterns in their relationship, which suggest an erotic involvement or attachment.   This homoerotic affinity need not have been consummated to be valid.  I am also suggesting the obvious that LGD had a very complex personality and that any attempt to characterize him as, say, utterly and robustly heterosexual is trite and untrue.  In a personal communication, Dr. Anthony Durrell, a practicing psychiatrist, has compared LGD's personality to an onion skin of many layers, and David Green has aptly noted that the photograph of Durrell as a French onion seller fits Dr. Durrell's analogy (see Gordon Bowker, Through the Dark Labyrinth: A Biography of Lawrence Durrell, London 1997:  fig. of Durrell in London, 1985).  I agree with both of them.


Bruce








-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20110324/9fd6696e/attachment.html 

From dtart at bigpond.net.au  Fri Mar 25 17:42:55 2011
From: dtart at bigpond.net.au (Denise Tart & David Green)
Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2011 11:42:55 +1100
Subject: [ilds] Miller's "Numinous Cock" v. Durrell's "Man-Size Piece"
In-Reply-To: <4D20CF6B-5AEF-41BB-8329-10706B245436@earthlink.net>
References: <4D20CF6B-5AEF-41BB-8329-10706B245436@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <F805EBA80F44472492716A16A9087A9C@DenisePC>

David Green has aptly noted that the photograph of Durrell as a French onion seller fits Dr. Durrell's analogy (see Gordon Bowker, Through the Dark Labyrinth: A Biography of Lawrence Durrell, London 1997:  fig. of Durrell in London, 1985).  I agree with both of them. 




Bruce

Bruce, there is no doubt in my mind that the guise of onion seller was deliberate and very much connected to Durrell's well known self deprecating sense of Humour, ythe same sense of humour that saw the creation of Oscar Epfs, the well know French Fart or should I say Fartist; if that aint two fingers up the artistic elite then I dont know wine when I drink it. the famous picture in Bowker was taken after the completion of the Avignon Quintet, certainly a most layered and complex and enigmatic work, a dark labyrinth indeed and so here we see Larry as the seller of onions, a marvelous satire of himself and his recent novel - and maybe the punters who bought it. Now I know that some of you out there have met Larry so I'd be keen to hear about about is sense of humour. his biographies suggest a man who could be a barrel of laughs.

As to bisexuality and beyond- 
We know much about Classical immodesty, or whatever we wish to call it, when dealing with sex, both from the literature and from the art.

..and of course Larry's much loved Greece became a bi word for homosexual love. This of course does not incriminate the author. His relationship with Miller was by all accounts platonic. However, is Brother Gerald claimed that Larry showed a keen interest in the bizarre sexual practices of various insects and other animals. certainly this is represented in some of his works.

David


From: Bruce Redwine 
Sent: Friday, March 25, 2011 10:16 AM
To: Durrell list 
Cc: Bruce Redwine 
Subject: [ilds] Miller's "Numinous Cock" v. Durrell's "Man-Size Piece"


Recent discussions on "bisexuality and beyond" have raised important questions about sexuality/bisexuality both in LGD's oeuvre and his personal life.  James Gifford's posted article ? "Reading Miller's 'Numinous Cock':  Heterosexist Presumption and Queerings of the Censored Text" ? provides new insights re Henry Miller's Tropic of Cancer (1934).  I shall extend these observations to Lawrence Durrell himself, which James does not do on this occasion.  His focus is different than mine.  I urge all to read James's very intriguing essay ? it's entirely worthwhile. 


To set the scene, in terms of the sexual issues, I'll quote one of Martial's short epigrams, taken from the D. R. Shackleton Bailey's translation of the Epigrams in the Loeb Library, vol. II (Cambridge, Mass., 1993).  Martial lived from c. 40 - c. 104 AD.  I think it highly probable that LGD was familiar with him.  Durrell knew Horace (cf. his "On First Looking into Loeb's Horace"), who's much harder to translate.  Given Martial's subject matter and the beauty of his Latin, he's been a popular poet to translate from the Renaissance on.  The poet Peter Porter, one of Durrell's admirers, translated many of the poems.  So, 


"Lascivam tota possedi nocte puellam,
  cuius nequitias vincere nemo potest.
fessus mille modis illud puerile poposci:
  ante preces totum primaque verba dedit.
improbius quiddam ridensque rubensque rogavi:
  pollicita est nulla luxuriosa mora.
sed mihi pura fuit; tibi non erit, Aeschyle, si vis
  accipere hoc munus condicione mala."




"All night long I enjoyed a wanton girl, whose naughtiness no man can exhaust.  Tired by a thousand different modes, I asked for the boy routine [illud puerile]; before I begged or started to beg, she gave it in full.  Laughing and blushing, I asked for something more indecent; the lustful hussy promised without hesitation.  But so far as I am concerned, she was undefiled; she won't be so far as you are concerned, Aeschylus, if you choose to accept this present on bad terms."


(IX. 67)


The poem is puzzling and deliberately provocative in the way that Martial likes to be.  His epigrams often end with a twist and then a slap in the face.  The "boy routine" (illud puerile) is a Latin euphemism for anal intercourse (see Peter Stothard in TLS, 26 January 2007).  Puer is Latin for a boy, one of Martial's favorite erotic interests, as well as for many older men in the Classical world.  In this episode, the girl (puellam) is being treated as a boy.  What is more "indecent" (improbius) is left to the imagination.  Today we would call illud puerile buggery and would label the puer a "punk" (American slang).  The Romans, like the Greeks, were quite open about such relationships and did not hold sodomy in opprobrium.  They did, however, make distinctions between active and passive roles, which corresponded to mature and adolescent males.  It was all right to be aggressive but disgraceful to be passive, if no longer a "youth" (see J. N. Adams on pedico, "bugger," in The Latin Sexual Vocabulary [Baltimore, 1982], 123-25).  The ancient Greeks made similar distinctions:  the submissive boy was the pais, the dominant male the erastes (the latter term is K. J. Dover's coinage; see his Greek Homosexuality [Cambridge, Mass., 1978], 16).


We know much about Classical immodesty, or whatever we wish to call it, when dealing with sex, both from the literature and from the art.  Greek vase painting is particularly revealing about numerous kinds of sexual acts and provides the evidence for many of Dover's comments.  I remember visiting Pompeii and going into the House of the Vettii, the villa of a wealthy family.  At the entrance was a painting of Priapus weighing his enormous penis against a sack of money.  Blatant pornography?  No, according to my guide, an art historian, that was the Roman way to wish prosperity on all who visit the house (see John R. Clarke, Looking at Lovemaking:  Constructions of Sexuality in Roman Art, 100 B.C. - A.D. 250 [Berkeley, 1998], 175, fig. 65).  The Pompeiians did not reserve sex for darkened bedrooms.


James Gifford takes the title of his essay from Gore Vidal's review of Ian MacNiven's edition of the Durrell-Miller Letters (1988).  I read the review many years ago and do not have access to it now.  Vidal begins his essay by commenting on the book's dust jacket, which has a 1939 photo of Miller and Durrell sitting on a Corfu beach, both completely naked.  Vidal describes Miller (who is almost bald, relaxed with legs extended and penis fully exposed, and looks directly into Nancy Durrell's lens) as having a "numinous cock."  A youthful Durrell hunches his shoulders, looks away from the camera, bends one leg up, and conceals his penis.  Vidal, if I recall correctly, describes Durrell as "elfin" ? who certainly appears shy, boyish, and, indeed, puerile.  Vidal was clearly fascinated by the photo ? and he should know homoeroticism when he sees it ? for the great author and critic is openly bisexual and frank about his proclivities and conquests.  In his memoir, Palimpsest (1995), he describes himself as a dominant male (see his depiction of a sexual encounter with Jack Kerouac, p. 233:  "I finally flipped him [Kerouac] over on his stomach . . . then he sighed as his head dropped back on the pillow.").  Vidal also knows Classical antiquity.  He wrote the novel Julian (1962), which deals with the Roman Emperor, Julian the Apostate.  I think Vidal saw something sexually familiar in Nancy's photo of the two friends and comrades in (literary) arms, but he did not go further, although his choice of Latinate "numinous" is suggestive of something strange and unusual happening in the scene.


I shall pursue the matter where Vidal left off.  So, remember the Greek setting and the erotic conventions of the fifth century B.C.  The 1939 photo resembles a scene on an ancient Greek vase where an erastes is in the company of his pais.  In 1974, thirty-five years later, Jill Krementz will take a photo of Miller and Durrell in bed together, presumably in Miller's home at Pacific Palisades, California (MacNiven, fig. 8).  This time the aged pair wear pajamas, are under bedcovers, and grin broadly at the camera.  The photo is obviously intended as a big joke.  But is it ? entirely?


Recall that in Durrell's famous letter to Miller, the one initiating their friendship and correspondence, the younger man says, "It [The Tropic of Cancer] strikes me as being the only really man-size piece of work which this century can really boast of" (August 1935; MacNiven, Letters, 2).  "Man-size piece" is an odd way to describe a novel.  "Boast" is also odd diction and reminds me of little boys who are fond of penile braggadocio ("Mine is bigger than yours").  Joseph A. Boone in his article, "Mappings of Male Desire in Durrell's Alexandria Quartet" (South Atlantic Quarterly 88 [1989], 75), calls Durrell's imagery "phallic."  I agree.  Moreover, the phallus is Miller's, as Durrell envisions it, or as he sees it in his erotic "mind's eye."


The roles that Miller and Durrell play and exchange over their long friendship do not neatly correspond to the erastes-pais paradigm.  I'm not claiming that the comparison is exact.  Later, as Durrell becomes successful, he will assume the dominant part.  Initially, however, the comparison is useful to consider.


Now, James in his essay justly emphasizes the homoerotic elements, often overlooked, in The Tropic of Cancer.  He analyzes in depth the scene where Miller penetrates or stimulates Van Norden's anus, as the latter is struggling to have intercourse with a female prostitute.  Van Norden struggles, and Miller is "tickling him in the rump" and dreaming of the former's penis (Tropic of Cancer [1961], 145).  Miller's use of the preposition in indicates digital penetration may have occurred.  What we have here is a form of buggery, which Martial would have well understood, perhaps as "improbius."  James concludes, "Stated bluntly, the only sexual penetration in the scene is Miller poking his finger in his friend's bum while dreaming of his friend's penis, which needs little critical intervention to reveal subversive, queer readings" (p. 7).  I fully agree.


James, however, doesn't explore the scene further and doesn't bring up other biographical associations, which he is undoubtedly aware of and perhaps saving for another essay.  The correspondences between fiction and life are rather obvious.  While on Corfu, Durrell reads The Tropic of Cancer, and, in homage to his hero Henry Miller, he names his cherished sailboat the Van Norden (Ian MacNiven, Lawrence Durrell:  A Biography [London 1998], 134).  Moreover, Durrell uses "Charles Norden" as a pseudonym for his novel Panic Spring (MacNiven, Lawrence Durrell, 116).  The issue of a pseudonym is not a minor consideration in LGD's development, and it takes the elder Miller to encourage the younger Durrell to wean himself from the dependency of "Charles Norden."  As Miller tells his friend, "The whole thing is a question of responsibility and willingness to accept one's fate . . . [I]n the end it will be L.D. who will be obliged to kill Charles Norden" (MacNiven, Letters, 85).  Another words, like a father or mentor, Miller is telling Durrell that it's time to grow up and be a man, and being "a man" involves a break or killing off some aspect of the past.


This evolving relationship, the progression from eroticism to mentorship, reminds me of those two lovers, Leila Hosnani and David Mountolive in Mountolive.  The older Leila loves and nurtures the much younger David, and their relationship eventually requires Leila's disfigurement, which may be taken as a death of some kind.  Is Leila Hosnani really Henry Miller in disguise?  So, the obvious question arises:  Does some part of Lawrence Durrell, conscious or not, so completely identify with Miller's fictional friend that he imagines or dreams of himself as having a homoerotic relationship with his hero?  I think so.  And that may account for Durrell's adulatory reference to Miller's "man-size piece" and provide a context for Vidal's use of "numinous."


Have I gone too far?  I don't think so.  I haven't done anything more than James has already done when he notes that the Obelisk Press edition of The Tropic of Cancer has as its logo the phallic symbol of an obelisk.  So, when readers handles the book, they are "unwittingly palming Miller's 'numinous cock'" (Gifford 1).  


Am I arguing that Durrell and Miller had a homosexual relationship?  No.  Am I arguing that Durrell was in fact homosexual?  No.  I am pointing out certain patterns in their relationship, which suggest an erotic involvement or attachment.   This homoerotic affinity need not have been consummated to be valid.  I am also suggesting the obvious that LGD had a very complex personality and that any attempt to characterize him as, say, utterly and robustly heterosexual is trite and untrue.  In a personal communication, Dr. Anthony Durrell, a practicing psychiatrist, has compared LGD's personality to an onion skin of many layers, and David Green has aptly noted that the photograph of Durrell as a French onion seller fits Dr. Durrell's analogy (see Gordon Bowker, Through the Dark Labyrinth: A Biography of Lawrence Durrell, London 1997:  fig. of Durrell in London, 1985).  I agree with both of them.




Bruce


















--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


_______________________________________________
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/20110326/72678308/attachment.html 

From alfandary at gmail.com  Sat Mar 26 12:37:38 2011
From: alfandary at gmail.com (Rony Alfandary)
Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2011 21:37:38 +0200
Subject: [ilds] off the wall
Message-ID: <AANLkTikWoNwYa7iEKQkY2Bjvhf-LEUGfNvVBt5MTSkPY@mail.gmail.com>

Thanks for the very illuminating piece on Durrell's concept of sexuality.
one can see from his writings that he was thinking about all kinds of
sexualities, his interest in psychoanalysis supports this and i think that
if he was born in a different era he may have been less inhibited in trying
out in practice what he tried out in fiction. but that is true for most of
us, isn't it?
anyhow, i had this crazy notion, and this may seem off the wall , that the
character of Dr Balthazar was  in fact connected to Durrell's interest in
Groddeck.
i find it interesting that he chose Balthazar of all possible characters to
present Darley with the interliner. somehow, it evoke in me Groddeck's
letters to Freud where Groddeck insisted on being Freud's disciple.
Rony
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20110326/cc5a57f5/attachment.html 

From bredwine1968 at earthlink.net  Sat Mar 26 13:50:58 2011
From: bredwine1968 at earthlink.net (Bruce Redwine)
Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2011 13:50:58 -0700
Subject: [ilds] off the wall
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikWoNwYa7iEKQkY2Bjvhf-LEUGfNvVBt5MTSkPY@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTikWoNwYa7iEKQkY2Bjvhf-LEUGfNvVBt5MTSkPY@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <C3E79FF9-9C65-4BB0-8894-42FB0B9B8E3F@earthlink.net>

Rony, I think that's the right question ? why Balthazar?  I can't answer with respect to Groddeck, but seems to me that Durrell's choices in characterization often have to do with some psychological impulse or need, ultimately based on some biographical reflex.  He's not like Shakespeare in this regard, whose characters don't seem projections of the playwright.  Also, there's a lot of allegory in Durrell, and his use of personal names is an aspect of that.


Bruce


 
On Mar 26, 2011, at 12:37 PM, Rony Alfandary wrote:

> Thanks for the very illuminating piece on Durrell's concept of sexuality. one can see from his writings that he was thinking about all kinds of sexualities, his interest in psychoanalysis supports this and i think that if he was born in a different era he may have been less inhibited in trying out in practice what he tried out in fiction. but that is true for most of us, isn't it?
> anyhow, i had this crazy notion, and this may seem off the wall , that the character of Dr Balthazar was  in fact connected to Durrell's interest in Groddeck.
> i find it interesting that he chose Balthazar of all possible characters to present Darley with the interliner. somehow, it evoke in me Groddeck's letters to Freud where Groddeck insisted on being Freud's disciple.
> Rony



From dtart at bigpond.net.au  Sat Mar 26 15:24:48 2011
From: dtart at bigpond.net.au (Denise Tart & David Green)
Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2011 09:24:48 +1100
Subject: [ilds] off the wall
In-Reply-To: <C3E79FF9-9C65-4BB0-8894-42FB0B9B8E3F@earthlink.net>
References: <AANLkTikWoNwYa7iEKQkY2Bjvhf-LEUGfNvVBt5MTSkPY@mail.gmail.com>
	<C3E79FF9-9C65-4BB0-8894-42FB0B9B8E3F@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <46221BE1324640FCBEA975075999FB47@DenisePC>

Not sure I agree with there Bruce - in respect to Shakespeare at least - 
Shakespeare the King of Shadows - Oberon, Prospero? He's in there sometimes 
and he played these parts too!

As to allegory - yes and the names of course have related meaning.

David

--------------------------------------------------
From: "Bruce Redwine" <bredwine1968 at earthlink.net>
Sent: Sunday, March 27, 2011 7:50 AM
To: <ilds at lists.uvic.ca>
Cc: "Bruce Redwine" <bredwine1968 at earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: [ilds] off the wall

> Rony, I think that's the right question ? why Balthazar?  I can't answer 
> with respect to Groddeck, but seems to me that Durrell's choices in 
> characterization often have to do with some psychological impulse or need, 
> ultimately based on some biographical reflex.  He's not like Shakespeare 
> in this regard, whose characters don't seem projections of the playwright. 
> Also, there's a lot of allegory in Durrell, and his use of personal names 
> is an aspect of that.
>
>
> Bruce
>
>
>
> On Mar 26, 2011, at 12:37 PM, Rony Alfandary wrote:
>
>> Thanks for the very illuminating piece on Durrell's concept of sexuality. 
>> one can see from his writings that he was thinking about all kinds of 
>> sexualities, his interest in psychoanalysis supports this and i think 
>> that if he was born in a different era he may have been less inhibited in 
>> trying out in practice what he tried out in fiction. but that is true for 
>> most of us, isn't it?
>> anyhow, i had this crazy notion, and this may seem off the wall , that 
>> the character of Dr Balthazar was  in fact connected to Durrell's 
>> interest in Groddeck.
>> i find it interesting that he chose Balthazar of all possible characters 
>> to present Darley with the interliner. somehow, it evoke in me Groddeck's 
>> letters to Freud where Groddeck insisted on being Freud's disciple.
>> Rony
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ILDS mailing list
> ILDS at lists.uvic.ca
> https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds