[ilds] Modern Love

Kennedy Gammage gammage.kennedy at gmail.com
Mon Jun 2 14:54:42 PDT 2014

That’s a good point James. Nor do I think F&F was solely concerned about
suppressing sales. Their editors may have been sensitive to the fact that
Durrell might be limiting himself, referring to bisexuality within what
promised to be the four dimensional scheme of the Quartet. In the end he
created characters who were heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, people
‘wounded in their sex’…cross-dressers like Scobie (a beloved character who
seems to me nothing like the author!) Not to mention brother-sister incest
- in the Quartet, but also in the Revolt and the Quintet too. (Twice in the
Quintet, right?)

Once you go the Spacetime route the genie is out of the bottle. No holds
barred, the sky’s the limit!

Cheers - Ken

On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 1:39 PM, James Gifford <james.d.gifford at gmail.com>

> Let's not forget that the "modern love" phrase was originally "bisexual
> love" nor that the opening epigram from Freud in /Justine/ has the "As for
> bisexuality, I am sure you are right!" removed by Fabers...
> Best,
> James
> On 2014-06-02, 11:46 AM, Bruce Redwine wrote:
>> As to the "nonsense bit," I would say we're simply following Lawrence
>> Durrell's own manifesto in the introduction to /Balthazar/ (1958):  "The
>> central topic of the book is an investigation of modern love."  I don't
>> think the permutations of "modern love" are nonsense.  Surely the author
>> himself must be included in such a discussion.
>> 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/20140602/fc7e6f38/attachment.html>

More information about the ILDS mailing list