[ilds] The Index to Prospero's Cell

Bruce Redwine bredwine1968 at earthlink.net
Tue Jul 22 14:51:56 PDT 2014


Ken,

Thanks for the good questions but sorry — gotta disagree with you on most points, except the previous comment about "Count D."  None of this discussion, however, detracts from PC as great literature.  We are really talking about Durrell's honesty.

One, what is an author's obligation to me as reader in 1961 (which I have the hubris to think is not much different from the audience of 1945)?  A lot.  If the author is writing fiction or some mix of the same, I expect fiction, not fiction posing as fact.  So, Nancy's reaction, it's "all lies."  She read her ex-husband's book as fact, hence her outrage.  Check out how some writers presented their novels around this period.  Orwell's Burmese Days (1934), which could be a memoir simply by the title, is called "A Novel by George Orwell."  Waugh's Brideshead Revisited (1945) has an Author's Note:  "I am not I:  thou are not he or she:  they are not they.  E.W."  We're obviously in the world of fiction.  Established writers of fiction don't need such signals, e.g., Joyce and Forster.  Travel literature, on the other hand, typically identifies itself as such (the same with guidebooks).  Kinglake's Eothen (1844) is subtitled Or Traces of Travel Brought Home from the East.  Durrell's subtitle to PC declares itself as existing in the world of fact.  PC's format confirms this assumption — subtitle, dedication (with "N." absent), dates, Appendix for Travelers, Brief Bibliography, and Index.  All these are associated with factual guidebooks or some kind of journal/memoir.  The only hint about fiction that I can see comes in the dedication where Durrell refers to "characters," as though he were summoning his dramatis personae.  Moreover, in today's world, writers who pose their work as fact when it's actually made-up (or plagiarized) get into a lot of trouble.  I believe something like that happened a while back on Oprah's show with one of her authors, whom she called on the carpet.  But I may be wrong.

Two, I don't think it's farfetched to assume Durrell and Faber were marketing a travel book to his British public.  Just who was that public?  Lawrence's and Orwell's coal miners and shopkeepers, the poor Tommies who fought the war as enlisted men?  All the hard-up folk at war's end?  Unlikely.  It was probably the same well-off Brits who read belles-lettres and could quote from memory their Horace.  Those were the ones who could appreciate Durrell's wit, his allusions, and his poetry.  That is to say, Patrick Leigh Fermor's friends, the classically educated, the upper crust, the retired officers who were looking for new adventures after defeating the Germans.

Three, an index is not a dramatis personae.  I can't think of any work of fiction that would contain one, for the simple fact an index is associated with non-fiction and would spoil the illusion.  Now, we can have a work of fiction like Sterne's Tristram Shandy, which breaks conventions and does all kinds of weird things.  Durrell is doing some Shandean hijinks with Count D. (as he does in some respects in the Quartet), but I don't think the comparison holds in the main.  Let me say again, that I take Durrell's Index in PC as an indication of what he considers important or interesting in his book, and N. is not therefore included, sadly.

Bruce



On Jul 22, 2014, at 12:09 PM, Kennedy Gammage <gammage.kennedy at gmail.com> wrote:

> Bruce, to me this is great stuff! It raises so many interesting issues. But again, the knives are out. What is the obligation of the author, in relation to his reader? As you said in your previous post, “Durrell is obviously the author of his own book and is obviously and ultimately responsible for everything that goes in it.” As he puts pen to paper, then follows up with his editor, then ultimately publishes a book with his name on it – what exactly is his obligation to you, Bruce Redwine, “at the age of 19 and green as one can get”? Does he have to hold your hand? Does he have to tell you the truth? What is truth? If you were a member of Oprah’s Book Club, and She put her imprimatur on Prospero’s Cell, and helped publish it to her fan club as a memoir – and then it turned out to be literature of some hybrid variety…or maybe let’s just leave it at literature…you might actually be eligible for some class action cash reward! Thank God that’s not the case – because as you may be able to tell, I am getting angry typing this!
> 
> The worst, and most ridiculous thing, you have to say is this: “…for marketing purposes, to capitalize on an anticipated market of Brits traveling to the Mediterranean after WWII.” We all know what England was like after the war – for a decade or more. Please. That’s utter rot. Give us a break.
> 
> Thanks - Ken
> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 11:05 AM, Bruce Redwine <bredwine1968 at earthlink.net> wrote:
> James, well taken.  Durrell may have written Prospero's Cell in the context of a genre of travel literature, Robert Byron's Road to Oxiana (1937) being the chief example.  Now we have Patrick Leigh Fermor, Durrell's close friend, being called the greatest British travel writer of the 20th century.  Paul Fussell has a good book on the subject, Abroad:  British Literary Traveling Between the Wars (1980).  Fussell distinguishes between guidebooks and travel literature, the former he says, "are not autobiographical and are not sustained by a narrative exploiting the devices of fiction" (203).  Prospero's Cell straddles both categories.  Its subtitle proclaims itself a guidebook (A Guide to the Landscape and Manners of the Island of Corcyra), but its narrative is autobiographical and takes the form of a writer's diary with dates.  Durrell wants it both ways:  non-fiction and fiction.  Durrell's reader, however, me for example at the age of 19 and green as one can get, would have problems figuring out what was going on and would naturally assume that Durrell was writing about his personal experiences — i.e., he was reporting fact.  Which, as we now know, was only occasionally true.  So my main point is that the readership of 1945 would probably has taken Prospero's Cell as a guidebook reported by the actual, personal experiences of a writer living on the island.  I doubt that readers would have assumed the book was an exercise in a new literary form.
> 
> Why did Durrell want it both ways?  One, proabably for marketing purposes, to capitalize on an anticipated market of Brits traveling to the Mediterranean after WWII.  Two, he was also nostalgic about Corfu, as he sat in his Ambron tower in Alexandria ("I loathed Egypt") and looked longingly towards Greece.
> 
> About N., I would say she gets treated badly in Prospero's Cell.  She's really just a very dim shadow in the story but one whose inheritance, if I recall correctly, pays for Durrell's adventure.  Ignoring her in the Index illustrates Durrell's feelings about his first wife.  I recall what Penelope Durrell Hope said at the Durrell Celebration in Alexandria (2007).  After her mother read PC, she said it was "all lies."  That sounds like proof of the punch line to the joke about a shepherd and his sheep — that is, it is better to have a mute sheep than a woman who "talk[s]" or talks back.
> 
> 
> Bruce
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Jul 22, 2014, at 9:48 AM, James Gifford <james.d.gifford at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> I am remembering with much fondness a visit to Freddie's in Louisville, which is an experience I recommend to all on the list for a companion piece to the 2015 Durrell Society panels in the February conference on 20th Century Literature and Culture...  It's conveniently adjacent to the voluptuous Brown Hotel and provides its own voluptuaries.
>> 
>> Charles Sligh and I had a very generous gin & tonic while chatting through the archival traces of memory Old D uses so much.  In fact, we chatted about this very book and matter, though I think it was a bit mixed up with other travel writers of the Fermour, Byron, & Douglas types.  Charles was a bit pointed in his remarks, which is unlike the man, so I kept it in mind and think I can represent his views faithfully.
>> 
>> Prospero's Cell would make much more sense if one reads the book from within the context of High Travel writing; Durrell is making his own innovations upon the styles of Douglas, Byron, &c., and readers of those authors always understood that gentleman travelers do not tell everything and change names and events and make minimal mention of companions; yes, a certain literacy matters in this elite sort of writing.
>> 
>> I also remember him saying, and I'm pretty sure I've got this near word for word, one should also look at the front matter for the 1945 printing of PC -- if I recall correctly, LD mentions that Miss Yvette Cohen helped with the typing -- the reduction of Nancy to N. and a smaller role is partly understandable when we keep that production reality at the fore.
>> 
>> I shared with him years ago my transcripts from the Gennadius Library as well, which includes some risque limericks, which Seferis had been writing and Durrell had been expanding.  He also had five unpublished mss. by Stephanides to sort through, perhaps verbatim.
>> 
>> Personally, I've always taken Durrell's oft-repeated phrase, "Pursewarden wrote somewhere..." or "I remember Stephanides once saying..." as really meaning "I'm pinching this bit."  If not pinching, I'm inclined to read those phrases as meaning "I'm completely fabricating something impossible here, so I'll give it a quick brush up of the ol' Victorian 'oops, I found a tablet with evidence on it' trick to lend just the hint of reality to fiction..."
>> 
>> And let's not forget that Gerald's /My Family and Other Animals/ erases Nancy entirely.  At least Durrell was open about the fictional nature of the "diary" dating of /PC/.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> James
>> 
>> On 2014-07-22, 9:01 AM, Bruce Redwine wrote:
>>> I agree with Ken's thorough explanation.  As he says, this raises other
>>> issues, one of those is the facticity of /Prospero's Cell,/ a subject
>>> discussed years ago on the List but worthy of further comment.  When I
>>> first read/ Prospero's Cell,/ I naively took it to be an accurate
>>> account of Durrell's experiences on Corfu, 1935-1939.  It's not.  It's a
>>> deliberate deception, part fact, much fiction, and much poetry (which
>>> beautifully disguises the fiction).  Michael Haag convinced me of this.
>>>  (I also believe that what's true of /PC/ is also true of Durrell's
>>> other travel books.  This could lead to a long discussion of the
>>> "truthiness" of travel literature in general!)  Durrell is obviously the
>>> author of his own book and is obviously and ultimately responsible for
>>> everything that goes in it.  He makes the selections of what goes into
>>> the story.  But what about the Index, a device which makes the narrative
>>> seem factual?  Did Durrell make the Index or did some editor at Faber?
>>>  If the Index is Durrell's, then it shows what he considers important.
>>>  Not all proper nouns are in the Index.  For example, "N." (Nancy) is
>>> not, but the Van Norden (the sailboat) is.  Nancy bought the sailboat
>>> but does not get a place in the Index.  I find this interesting.
>>> 
>>> 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/20140722/549fa49c/attachment.html>


More information about the ILDS mailing list