[ilds] "Facts"

James Gifford james.d.gifford at gmail.com
Sat Jul 23 21:22:42 PDT 2011

I was waiting for Bill!

I've been told recently to "put myself first," but I wasn't sure where I 
would put myself and just what part of me would qualify -- I opted for 
my signature, but somehow I didn't seem to be there as they sheet moved 
out of sight, and I must admit that I'd be gladly parted from my 
signature before any other part of me...

 > Bill (this name is NOT ME.)

I'm thinking of LD's "Asylum in the Snow": "What is in a name? When you 
are afraid of something, or you want to hate it, you give it a name.... 
It is covered in a name, and you do not see it properly, you only see 
the little black letters."

I can only hope that I've somehow got to know "YOU" over the years.

Of course, Hitchcock had something else in mind when he "appeared" in 
his work, which ain't quite the same as "putting" himself in his work 
(and now I think back to my restaurant days...).  Hitchcock could put 
him image in his films, but I'm quite sure it's a different Hitchcock 
than the work-a-day man at home with his wife, and she might even 
recognize his performance of self rather than self.  Self to Not-Self?

 > Verbal clues do not a real person make.

Now, this is open to a good debate...  Am "I" more than verbal clues, or 
as other may have it, a linguistic posture?  A real person pre-verbal? 
Hmmm.  I'm torn between the reactionary and the radical on that one. 
"I" really am "torn," whatever that means.


On 23/07/11 7:24 PM, Godshalk, William (godshawl) wrote:
> As I've said before -- and heard on the radio this evening -- words
> on a page aren't real people. A photo is not a read person.
> I once had a student who said that he could put himself into this
> writing. I asked him to do that.
> Verbal clues do not a real person make.
> Bill (this name is NOT ME.)
> W. L. Godshalk * Department of English    *           * University of
> Cincinnati*   * Stellar Disorder  * OH 45221-0069 *  *
> ________________________________________ From:
> ilds-bounces at lists.uvic.ca [ilds-bounces at lists.uvic.ca] On Behalf Of
> Bruce Redwine [bredwine1968 at earthlink.net] Sent: Friday, July 22,
> 2011 7:11 PM To: Denise Tart&  David Green; ilds at lists.uvic.ca Cc:
> Bruce Redwine Subject: Re: [ilds] "Facts"
> David,
> Yes.  Artists appear in their own works.  Painters have been known to
> do this — and I'm not referring to self-portraits.  Caravaggio?
> Alfred Hitchcock walks through his own films.  I once had a
> professor, Ralph Rader, argue convincingly that Laurence Sterne
> plants clues that he himself is the father of Tristram Shandy and not
> Walter Shandy, the fictional father.  Etc., etc.  Offhand, however, I
> can't think of anyone going to the extent Durrell does to make
> himself a character in his own book.  A lot of people have been duped
> by Count D., but he's fictional in the sense he's not the person he
> appears to be.  This gets complicated, however, because he is real,
> as real as LD himself.  But was LD real?  Psychiatrists should have
> something to say about that.
> Bruce
> On Jul 22, 2011, at 3:07 PM, Denise Tart&  David Green wrote:
> No, I don't think "N." instead of "Nancy" is a lie.  We also have
> "E." (Eve) in Reflections on a Marine Venus.  The inventions I have
> in mind are ones such as the scene at Saint Arsenius, which a
> granddaughter questions as true (see Charles newspaper), and Count
> D., who is most probably old LD himself in disguise.  Then there's
> the whole issue of the plagiarism of Sophie Atkinson's An Artist in
> Corfu.  I would call such plagiarism a form of lying.
> Bruce
> My Dear Redwine, I have been reading over some passages of Prospero's
> Cell, arguable the finest book ever written in the English language,
> and find myself coming to your view that Count D is indeed a
> projection of /creation of the author - the artist as god of his own
> universe. Counts D's philosophical speculations are those of the
> author, the recluse in valley is what Larry became later, the love of
> wine and peasants, the knowledge of Shakespeare. Zarian, Theodore and
> Max appear in the book with their consent..but why then count 'D' who
> appears with his own consent? the author appears in his own book
> twice with the old count cradling the young author. on page 77 of my
> 1945 hardback Zarian says:-
> "if only he would write a book...it would be a work of genius...and
> if he can live without the thought of suicide.." something struck me
> about this - the literary ambition and Durrell dark side..mmm
> The character of the Count has always inspired me. perhaps because it
> is like meeting the author in his chosen landscape???
> David Whitewine
> _______________________________________________ ILDS mailing list
> ILDS at lists.uvic.ca https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds

More information about the ILDS mailing list