[ilds] ILDS Digest, Vol 97, Issue 18_Appended text

[Sumantra Nag]

Richard!

Have you noticed the huge tail of messages - apparently from a Digest of
ILDS - that comes appended with your posts?

Sumantra

Sent from my Asus Zenfone
There will be an online statement of LD's personal library holdings shortly
(assembled from all available sources), when the new Durrell Library
website goes public. Watch this space.
Richard Pine
Durrell Library of Corfu

-----Original Message-----
*From:* ilds-request at lists.uvic.ca [mailto:ilds-request at lists.uvic.ca]
*Sent:* Monday, May 18, 2015 03:00 PM
*To:* ilds at lists.uvic.ca
*Subject:* ILDS Digest, Vol 97, Issue 18

Send ILDS mailing list submissions to ilds at lists.uvic.ca To subscribe or
unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds or, via email, send a message
with subject or body 'help' to ilds-request at lists.uvic.ca You can reach the
person managing the list at ilds-owner at lists.uvic.ca When replying, please
edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of ILDS
digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Did LGD read JRRT? (Kennedy Gammage) 2. Re:
Did LGD read JRRT? (James Gifford) 3. Re: Durrell's materialism (Denise
Tart & David Green) 4. Durrell/ Tolkien Readers (Denise Tart & David Green)
5. Re: Of course Tolkien was not being truthful_Durrell a "religious
writer"? (Sumantra Nag) 6. Re: Of course Tolkien was not being
truthful_Durrell documentary of 1977 (Sumantra Nag) 7. Caesar's Vast Ghost,
review by Bobby Matheme, 2002 (Denise Tart & David Green) 8. Re: ILDS
Digest, Vol 97, Issue 15 (Sumantra Nag) 9. Re: Durrell?s Characters
(Sumantra Nag) 10. Re: Durrell?s Characters-including the city of
Alexandria (Sumantra Nag) 11. Re: Durrell?s Characters (Sumantra Nag) 12.
Fwd: RE: Durrell?s Characters (Sumantra Nag) 13. Re: Of course Tolkien was
not being truthful_Durrell a "religious writer"? (Bruce Redwine) 14. Re: Of
course Tolkien was not being truthful_Durrell documentary of 1977 (Bruce
Redwine) 15. Re: Caesar's Vast Ghost, review by Bobby Matheme, 2002 (Bruce
Redwine)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1 Date: Sun, 17 May 2015 13:51:34 -0700 From: Kennedy Gammage  To:
ilds at lists.uvic.ca Subject: [ilds] Did LGD read JRRT? Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" I personally think it?s likely,
even if copies weren?t in Durrell?s library (is there an online list of the
books he owned?) ? and I was also curious about his habits with books. They
probably didn?t have many English language titles in the local libraries.
Did he share books with friends, mailing them and receiving them from
around the world? LotR was just becoming popular the same time the Quartet
was. If he didn?t actually read it he must have at least been aware of it.
LotR is widely considered to be fantasy, as opposed to science fiction ? a
genre Durrell mentioned in the Balthazar Note. Anecdotally, several older
brothers of my schoolmates at about that time were reading the Revolt, and
they considered it to be science fiction (though the fabrication of an
apparently living woman out of gutta-percha using the technology of the day
was certainly fantastic.) Because of the many fabulous examples we?ve been
referencing from his writing, I want to believe Durrell sometimes read
science fiction and fantasy - but I?m not sure there?s any evidence of that
in his library. Cheers - Ken -------------- next part -------------- An
HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:  ------------------------------
Message: 2 Date: Sun, 17 May 2015 15:40:07 -0700 From: James Gifford  To:
ilds at lists.uvic.ca Subject: Re: [ilds] Did LGD read JRRT? Message-ID: <
555918C7.9040309 at gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252;
format=flowed Hi Ken, There's no Tolkien in Durrell's library at
Carbondale. I don't remember seeing any in Paris, but I wasn't really
looking either -- I'll hunt that down online through their catalogue... I
don't know of any other connections between them nor do I remember (or
easily spot right now) any references to Tolkien in Durrell's letters. As
for LOTR, I may be wrong on this, but my impression is that it became the
bestseller in the 1960s in the USA more than in Britain, at least at first
(a bit like Orwell's 1984). Because, hippies... A question might also be
the degree to which Durrell's readers would also have been readers of
Tolkien, which I'm afraid I can't really give any solid evidence for. As
for gutta percha, I've always assumed that was based on the importance of
the sap for the first underwater telegraph cable to North America. 1960s
communications histories or media studies would been interested in this, ?
la McLuhan. The sci-fi of /Revolt/ is to me as much about the changes in
and commercialization of telecommunications & recording technologies as it
is the robotic innovations and more obviously sci-fi stuff. All best, James
On 2015-05-17 1:51 PM, Kennedy Gammage wrote: > I personally think it?s
likely, even if copies weren?t in Durrell?s > library (is there an online
list of the books he owned?) ? and I was > also curious about his habits
with books. They probably didn?t have many > English language titles in the
local libraries. Did he share books with > friends, mailing them and
receiving them from around the world? LotR was > just becoming popular the
same time the Quartet was. If he didn?t > actually read it he must have at
least been aware of it. > > LotR is widely considered to be fantasy, as
opposed to science fiction ? > a genre Durrell mentioned in the Balthazar
Note. Anecdotally, several > older brothers of my schoolmates at about that
time were reading the > Revolt, and they considered it to be science
fiction (though the > fabrication of an apparently living woman out of
gutta-percha using the > technology of the day was certainly fantastic.)
Because of the many > fabulous examples we?ve been referencing from his
writing, I want to > believe Durrell sometimes read science fiction and
fantasy - but I?m not > sure there?s any evidence of that in his library. >
> Cheers - Ken > > > > _______________________________________________ >
ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca >
https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds >
------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Mon, 18 May 2015 08:48:46
+1000 From: "Denise Tart & David Green"  To:  Subject: Re: [ilds] Durrell's
materialism Message-ID: <999F62072B814B61915C31A6906B7011 at DenisePC>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original Thanks. The book you mention is not mine, but one my
wife co wrote with 4 other women. It started out a joke and then they got
serious about it and, bingo, Random House liked it and after much
reworking, they published it. It has sold fairly well here so far and
should be available in hard cover in USA in June. The author is Alice
Campion. I believe there is an e book available now I believe. Yes, don't
feed the Trolls and stay away from orcs, especially the large, New Zealand
Maori rugby types. Denise and I will be in Sommierres in a couple weeks. I
should probably read Caesar's Vast Ghost before we get there. David 16
William Street Marrickville NSW 2204 +61 2 9564 6165 0412 707 625
-------------------------------------------------- From: "Odos"  Sent:
Sunday, May 17, 2015 11:39 PM To:  Subject: Re: [ilds] Durrell's
materialism > Nicely said, David, and thanks for sharing the links to your
new books! > > I may need to reconsider after going back to Cefalu / Dark
Labyrinth... > next week... And of course, Tolkien's great truths amidst
fantasy were > ethical & spiritual. He and Durrell would have that in
common, and of > course the take-home practical advice of LOTR: don't feed
the trolls. > > Best, > James > > Sent from my iPad > >> On May 17, 2015,
at 12:55 AM, Denise Tart & David Green >>  wrote: >> >> James, yes, but
maybe a re read of Dark Labyrinth for you AND his myth is >> not so
materialistic in the island books, but then he still had a private >>
income and in a transcendental space inspired by ancient and modern >>
Greece which he transubstantiated into his wonderful sea girt books?? >> >>
David >> >> >> Denise Tart >> Co-author - The Painted Sky by Alice Campion
- out NOW - Random House >> Australia - >>
http://www.randomhouse.com.au/books/alice-campion/the-painted-sky-9780857984852.aspx
>> Co-author - How to Write Fiction as a Group - out NOW - >>
www.groupfiction.net >> Marriage Celebrant - Denise Tart - designing
ceremonies - >> www.denisetart.com.au >> 16 William Street >> Marrickville
NSW 2204 >> +61 2 9564 6165 >> 0412 707 625 > >
_______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list >
ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds
------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Mon, 18 May 2015 09:02:28
+1000 From: "Denise Tart & David Green"  To: "James Gifford" , "Durrel"
Subject: [ilds] Durrell/ Tolkien Readers Message-ID:
<111726D5FCB0459D92BA4475DFB5002D at DenisePC> Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1" A question might also be the degree to which Durrell's
readers would also have been readers of Tolkien, which I'm afraid I can't
really give any solid evidence for. James, I can provide one piece of
evidence, me. Born in 1959, I read both Tolkien (many times) and Both
Durrell's many times in the 70s and 80s. Havn't read Tolkien for years, but
keep reading Durrell. Durrell was a hit in avante garde arty circles here
in Oz in the 60s/70s - Tolkien less so, but he was widely read, so I'd say
there were more than a few who read both. Peter Jackson did a good job with
the first LOTR movie, the fellowship, then lost the plot, especially in The
Hobbit; refused to watch it after number one. Yeah, the hippies
appropriated Tolkien and also Waldorf/Steiner schools. I have worked at one
for ten years. There are schools called Lorien and kids with names like
Arwen. There is lot of vegetarianism and herbal remedies. Ah,
Hippies....Pour me a beer. David 16 William Street Marrickville NSW 2204
+61 2 9564 6165 0412 707 625 -------------- next part -------------- An
HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:  ------------------------------
Message: 5 Date: Mon, 18 May 2015 07:57:17 +0530 From: Sumantra Nag  To:
ilds at lists.uvic.ca Cc: James Gifford , Bruce Redwine  Subject: Re: [ilds]
Of course Tolkien was not being truthful_Durrell a "religious writer"?
Message-ID:  Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Bruce, I'm not sure
I understand in what sense Durrell can be described as a religious writer.
>From the evidence emerging about Durrell as a person - much of which has
been frankly presented by you in your exchanges - it would be difficult to
see Durrell anchored to religion influences which guided his personal life.
His relationship with women seemed to involve a high level of aggression on
his part. His treatment of his daughter Sappho appears to have been
questioned. In this aspect of Durrell I'm drawing from what I have read in
ILDS exchanges. Sumantra Sent from my Samsung Tab On 17 May 2015 01:46,
"Bruce Redwine"  wrote: > James, > > Stimulating response. Okay. We differ.
I tend to treat Durrell?s > literary output as evidence for his personal
philosophy. He?s a religious > writer, in my opinion. He has a view to
propagate. His *Quartet,* as he > states in the note to *Balthazar,* is an
?investigation.? I take him at > his word (which presents problems, of
course). He doesn?t say he writing > fiction with a moral, a story to
instruct and amuse, Chaucer?s ?sentence? > and ?solaas.? He?s out to prove
and demonstrate something. You might say > Durrell is in the great
tradition of ?spiritual autobiography,? another > Bunyan and his *Pilgrim?s
Progress.* > > So I don?t separate the man from his work. If all we had to
go on about > Lawrence Durrell was his oeuvre, then your approach to
?truth? in his > writings makes sense. But we know a great deal about his
life and > behavior, often from his many statements in various media. The
dominant > impression I get from those ?communications? is a propensity to
dissemble, > to prevaricate, and to lie. All of which resemble the
*Quartet?s* > unstable world without certainties. You can say he?s creating
a ?public > persona,? reprising his diplomatic role as Director of Public
Relations or > just confounding ?the bastards,? but I think it?s much
deeper than all > that. I think he?s revealing something about himself, an
inability to > distinguish fact from fiction. Not all the time, of course,
but when it > comes to personal matters. Bill Godshalk said he was a
?fabulator.? Yes, > but that?s a nice way to say he lied a lot. > > I
recall the opening to the 1977 documentary about Durrell?s return to >
Alexandria. The camera floats in from the sea and approaches the city with
> its magnificent skyline. A voice intones those memorable words from >
*Balthazar:* ?We saw, inverted in the sky, a full-scale mirage of the >
city.? We see Durrell and assume the words are his, if not the voice. >
Well, neither. The words are from the novel, but Durrell had stolen them, >
without accreditation, from R. Talbot Kelly?s *Egypt: Painted and >
Described* (1903). The author, however, appears to believe the >
description was actually his. > > Bruce > > > > > > On May 15, 2015, at
12:43 PM, James Gifford  > wrote: > > Hi Bruce, > > I do think this is
where we disagree -- I don't have any particular grudge > against Tolkien
for his misdirections, and I do think Durrell's > contradictory truths are
a genuine perspective. For instance, the passage > you point to in the
Quartet, and others like it, gesture to the > unresolvable nature of truth
when we live in a world made up of subjects > observing 'reality' from a
multitude of perspectives. > > As an example, did Justine ever love Darley,
or was she merely using him > as a blind for her political interests, or
for Pursewarden? It's probably > not a question to be answered, since the
perspective changes it, including > Justine's retrospective
self-observations. > > I suspect this is also the appeal of the popularized
notions of relativity > or quantum strangeness for Durrell -- there are
many contradictory > perspectives from which to view the world, but there's
not "godly" position > at the centre from which to sort out absolute truth,
and likewise there's > no fixed point at which the Enlightenment subject is
eternally fixed, > instead leaving instead a protean process of
subjectivity in its place. > > There are other lies as well, such as
Durrell's BBC years, which I see as > an occasional part of his
correspondences but a pervasive part of his > interviews. I suspect the
interviews are almost all performance, and it > would be speculation to ask
how much of the bafflegab around the truth > Durrell believed versus how
much was a public persona for a private person. > > However, I personally
don't pick up fiction to look for truth, or at least > not in any
conventional sense. I trust the telling more than the tale, if > that's a
fair way to put it, and the teller's involvement with the telling > & tale
is suspect. > > All best, > James > > On 2015-05-15 12:19 PM, Bruce Redwine
wrote: > > James, > > Yes, authors lie, and so do many people. They do it
for various > reasons, some excusable, some not. Durrell?s motives,
however, I find > suspect. In fact, I think they?re pathological ? the man
couldn?t > distinguish between truth and fiction, or chose not to, and then
turned > that disposition into a philosophic principle: ?Truth is what most
> contradicts itself in time.? In Haag?s /City of Memory,/ Eve Cohen says >
this about him ? he?s not to be trusted; he?s a storyteller. Bill >
Godshalk lying in order to describe lying, if I understand correctly, is >
an example of the ?liars paradox.? Statements about lying ? ?I am > lying?
? are insolvable in terms of truth value, just as > Durrell?s/Balthazar?s
statement about truth is contradictory. Now, we > can say this is a
profound observation about the way things are, or we > can say there?s
something wrong with the person who says and believes > it. I prefer the
latter. > > Bruce > > _______________________________________________ >
ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca >
https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > > >
_______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list >
ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > >
-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:  ------------------------------ Message: 6 Date: Mon, 18 May 2015
08:01:32 +0530 From: Sumantra Nag  To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca Cc: James Gifford ,
Bruce Redwine  Subject: Re: [ilds] Of course Tolkien was not being
truthful_Durrell documentary of 1977 Message-ID:  Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="utf-8" Can this documentary be accessed through the Net? I did
read the article about his visit of 1977. Sumantra Sent from my Samsung Tab
On 17 May 2015 01:46, "Bruce Redwine"  wrote: > James, > > Stimulating
response. Okay. We differ. I tend to treat Durrell?s > literary output as
evidence for his personal philosophy. He?s a religious > writer, in my
opinion. He has a view to propagate. His *Quartet,* as he > states in the
note to *Balthazar,* is an ?investigation.? I take him at > his word (which
presents problems, of course). He doesn?t say he writing > fiction with a
moral, a story to instruct and amuse, Chaucer?s ?sentence? > and ?solaas.?
He?s out to prove and demonstrate something. You might say > Durrell is in
the great tradition of ?spiritual autobiography,? another > Bunyan and his
*Pilgrim?s Progress.* > > So I don?t separate the man from his work. If all
we had to go on about > Lawrence Durrell was his oeuvre, then your approach
to ?truth? in his > writings makes sense. But we know a great deal about
his life and > behavior, often from his many statements in various media.
The dominant > impression I get from those ?communications? is a propensity
to dissemble, > to prevaricate, and to lie. All of which resemble the
*Quartet?s* > unstable world without certainties. You can say he?s creating
a ?public > persona,? reprising his diplomatic role as Director of Public
Relations or > just confounding ?the bastards,? but I think it?s much
deeper than all > that. I think he?s revealing something about himself, an
inability to > distinguish fact from fiction. Not all the time, of course,
but when it > comes to personal matters. Bill Godshalk said he was a
?fabulator.? Yes, > but that?s a nice way to say he lied a lot. > > I
recall the opening to the 1977 documentary about Durrell?s return to >
Alexandria. The camera floats in from the sea and approaches the city with
> its magnificent skyline. A voice intones those memorable words from >
*Balthazar:* ?We saw, inverted in the sky, a full-scale mirage of the >
city.? We see Durrell and assume the words are his, if not the voice. >
Well, neither. The words are from the novel, but Durrell had stolen them, >
without accreditation, from R. Talbot Kelly?s *Egypt: Painted and >
Described* (1903). The author, however, appears to believe the >
description was actually his. > > Bruce > > > > > > On May 15, 2015, at
12:43 PM, James Gifford  > wrote: > > Hi Bruce, > > I do think this is
where we disagree -- I don't have any particular grudge > against Tolkien
for his misdirections, and I do think Durrell's > contradictory truths are
a genuine perspective. For instance, the passage > you point to in the
Quartet, and others like it, gesture to the > unresolvable nature of truth
when we live in a world made up of subjects > observing 'reality' from a
multitude of perspectives. > > As an example, did Justine ever love Darley,
or was she merely using him > as a blind for her political interests, or
for Pursewarden? It's probably > not a question to be answered, since the
perspective changes it, including > Justine's retrospective
self-observations. > > I suspect this is also the appeal of the popularized
notions of relativity > or quantum strangeness for Durrell -- there are
many contradictory > perspectives from which to view the world, but there's
not "godly" position > at the centre from which to sort out absolute truth,
and likewise there's > no fixed point at which the Enlightenment subject is
eternally fixed, > instead leaving instead a protean process of
subjectivity in its place. > > There are other lies as well, such as
Durrell's BBC years, which I see as > an occasional part of his
correspondences but a pervasive part of his > interviews. I suspect the
interviews are almost all performance, and it > would be speculation to ask
how much of the bafflegab around the truth > Durrell believed versus how
much was a public persona for a private person. > > However, I personally
don't pick up fiction to look for truth, or at least > not in any
conventional sense. I trust the telling more than the tale, if > that's a
fair way to put it, and the teller's involvement with the telling > & tale
is suspect. > > All best, > James > > On 2015-05-15 12:19 PM, Bruce Redwine
wrote: > > James, > > Yes, authors lie, and so do many people. They do it
for various > reasons, some excusable, some not. Durrell?s motives,
however, I find > suspect. In fact, I think they?re pathological ? the man
couldn?t > distinguish between truth and fiction, or chose not to, and then
turned > that disposition into a philosophic principle: ?Truth is what most
> contradicts itself in time.? In Haag?s /City of Memory,/ Eve Cohen says >
this about him ? he?s not to be trusted; he?s a storyteller. Bill >
Godshalk lying in order to describe lying, if I understand correctly, is >
an example of the ?liars paradox.? Statements about lying ? ?I am > lying?
? are insolvable in terms of truth value, just as > Durrell?s/Balthazar?s
statement about truth is contradictory. Now, we > can say this is a
profound observation about the way things are, or we > can say there?s
something wrong with the person who says and believes > it. I prefer the
latter. > > Bruce > > _______________________________________________ >
ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca >
https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > > >
_______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list >
ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > >
-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:  ------------------------------ Message: 7 Date: Mon, 18 May 2015
12:36:56 +1000 From: "Denise Tart & David Green"  To: "Bruce Redwine" ,
Cc: Durrel  Subject: [ilds] Caesar's Vast Ghost, review by Bobby Matheme,
2002 Message-ID:  Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" To read
Durrell's book is to wander through Caesar's vast ghost, Provence, and to
become intimately familiar with its many Roman aspects. He writes of
Provence as though it were a 2,000 year old suburb of Rome where its
retired generals and consuls moved to escape the hurl-burly of city life.
To wander through Provence is to quaff it heady brew: wine, that ubiquitous
concoction - whether it be of "poor contrivance" or a connoisseur's choice.
One is ready to accept his friend Aldo's declaration that "everything
really desirable has come about because of, or in spite of, wine!" One
stands in awe of the fabled aqueduct with the graceful arches, Pont du
Gard, and is reminded once again of the Roman presence in Provence. As
Durrell said, "It is obvious that the country is a funnel through which
almost every race, ancient and modern, has marched either towards or away
from, a war." A land of unlikely contrasts, where you can as easily find
signs of bull worship as Buffalo Bill worship. Tombs of beloved poets
beside tombs of their beloved pets. Great winds that rake the land named
"mistral", of both atmospheric and poetic origin. Amphitheaters, ruins,
relics, ancient coins and pottery shards greet you at every turn of the
road or the shovel. From the fragile black past of Celtic ware to the
golden Greek pottery light enough to float in water. Like a great
continental palimpsest of European cultures, Provence awaits your pleasure.
Come early, leave late, and taste the abundant delights. And while you
await passage to Provence, wherever you are, prop open this gorgeous book
and imbibe large intoxicating draughts of its fragrant bouquet. In
brilliant color and picturesque story, Caesar's vast ghost is proffered to
be quaffed like a highly contrived dry red wine to stave off the prolonged
drought before arrival on the sunny shores of the Rhone. David Green 16
William Street Marrickville NSW 2204 +61 2 9564 6165 0412 707 625
-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:  ------------------------------ Message: 8 Date: Mon, 18 May 2015
08:09:15 +0530 From: Sumantra Nag  To: James Gifford  Cc: Charles Sligh ,
ilds at lists.uvic.ca, alfandary at gmail.com, Bruce Redwine , Richard Pine
Subject: Re: [ilds] ILDS Digest, Vol 97, Issue 15 Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Why not, James? Sumantra Sent
from my Samsung Tab Indeed, it may even be 29 pp. or more... But I'll not
mention that on the list. -James On 2015-05-17 8:15 AM, Sumantra Nag wrote:
> Is there a massive tail of messages from a Digest here? > > Sumantra > >
Sent from my Asus Zenfone > > On 17 May 2015 18:37,  > wrote: > > This
statement: "I don't have any particular grudge against Tolkien > for his
misdirections" is pointless, meaningless and pathetically > naive, What if
anything does it mean? What are Tolkien's > "misdirections" and, if it
could be established that they exist(ed), > why should anyone "have a
grudge"? > On the subject of mendacity, consider the Cretan paradox which
has > exercised philosophers, logicians and even mathematicians since at >
least 600 BC: a Cretan tells you ?All Cretans are liars?. This means > that
the speaker is a liar; so how do you believe him? If he is to > be believed
? which on his own admission he isn?t ? then Cretans are > truthful, thus
disproving his statement. If the statement is true, > then it is false; if
it is false, then it is true. The paradox > illustrates perfectly the
difficulty in discovering the truth or > otherwise of any given situation.
As Lawrence Durrell put it: ?to > accept two contradictory ideas as
simultaneously true?. The beauty > of the paradox ? and all paradoxes are
beautiful ? lies in its > circularity. > Richard Pine > Durrell Library of
Corfu > > >
------------------------------------------------------------------------ >
> > -----Original Message----- > *From:* ilds-request at lists.uvic.ca >  >
[mailto:ilds-request at lists.uvic.ca > ] > *Sent:* Saturday, May 16, 2015
03:00 PM > *To:* ilds at lists.uvic.ca  > *Subject:* ILDS Digest, Vol 97,
Issue 15 > > Send ILDS mailing list submissions to ilds at lists.uvic.ca >  To
subscribe or unsubscribe via the > World Wide Web, visit >
https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds or, via email, send > a message
with subject or body 'help' to > ilds-request at lists.uvic.ca  > You can
reach the person managing the list at > ilds-owner at lists.uvic.ca  When >
replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re:
Contents of ILDS digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: Of > course Tolkien was
not being truthful (Bruce Redwine) 2. Re: Of > course Tolkien was not being
truthful (James Gifford) 3. Re: > ILDS Digest, Vol 97, Issue 14 (
mail at durrelllibrarycorfu.org > ) 4. Re: Of course Tolkien > was not being
truthful (dtart at bigpond.net.au > ) 5. Re: Of course Tolkien was not > being
truthful (Bruce Redwine) 6. Re: Of course Tolkien was not > being truthful
(Sumantra Nag) 7. missing messages & digest > options (James Gifford) 8.
Re: Durrell?s Characters (Sumantra > Nag) 9. Re: Durrell?s Characters
(Sumantra Nag) 10. Re: Of > course Tolkien was not being truthful (
dtart at bigpond.net.au > ) 11. Re: Of course Tolkien was not > being truthful
(Bruce Redwine) 12. Re: Durrell?s Characters > (Merrianne) 13. Re: Of
course Tolkien was not being truthful > (david wilde) 14. Re: Durrell?s
Characters (Bruce Redwine) 15. > Tolkien's truthiness (James Gifford) 16.
Re: Tolkien's > truthiness (Bruce Redwine) 17. Re: Tolkien's truthiness
(James > Gifford) > >
---------------------------------------------------------------------- >
Message: 1 Date: Fri, 15 May 2015 12:19:55 -0700 From: Bruce > Redwine __
To: james.d.gifford at gmail.com > , ilds at lists.uvic.ca >  Cc: Bruce Redwine
__ Subject: Re: > [ilds] Of course Tolkien was not being truthful
Message-ID: > <62CE8989-899A-4E6A-8545-EBFED872295E at earthlink.net > > >
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" James, Yes, > authors lie,
and so do many people. They do it for various > reasons, some excusable,
some not. Durrell?s motives, however, I > find suspect. In fact, I think
they?re pathological ? the man > couldn?t distinguish between truth and
fiction, or chose not to, > and then turned that disposition into a
philosophic principle: > ?Truth is what most contradicts itself in time.?
In Haag?s City > of Memory, Eve Cohen says this about him ? he?s not to be
> trusted; he?s a storyteller. Bill Godshalk lying in order to > describe
lying, if I understand correctly, is an example of the > ?liars paradox.?
Statements about lying ? ?I am lying? ? are > insolvable in terms of truth
value, just as > Durrell?s/Balthazar?s statement about truth is
contradictory. > Now, we can say this is a profound observation about the
way > things are, or we can say there?s something wrong with the > person
who says and believes it. I prefer the latter. Bruce > On > May 15, 2015,
at 10:42 AM, James Gifford __ wrote: > > Hi Bruce, > > > Check your spam
folder -- I just checked mine in gmail, and > the message was there (likely
either the email address has been > flagged for some reason or else the
quoting of the entire digest > set off the filter). > > As for Tolkien, he
also maintained the > wars didn't influence the books, which is just as
ridiculous as > saying Wagner has no kinship. A good friend wrote his
honours > thesis on Tolkien and has always told me to distrust the author,
> but Charles Sligh is our resident expert on ents, Porius, and > all
things fantastical. > > I'm reminded of an exchange of > letters I had with
Mary Stewart, asking if there was any > influence from Durrell on her Corfu
novel -- she said no, but > isn't Durrell fascinating for.... and then it
went into a > demonstration of just how closely she'd been reading Old D. >
> > Authors lie. So do most people. And intentions change in > retrospect.
I wish I could read Bill tapping out a lie to > describe an author lying...
One can simply think of Durrell's > interview with Muggeridge on the BCC CD
of Durrell recordings > from the centenary -- something to the effect of
"During my > years with the BBC" followed by "And when was that, Larry?" Of
> course there were none... > > But even Durrell's advice in > /Personal
Landscape/ (the section we've already discussed in > /Elephant/) sets the
poet, public, and poem as distinct > entities. I can't imagine he'd feel
different about fiction. The > poet's interests are not the same as the
public's nor the poem's > and have no greater (or lesser) force either. > >
James Clawson, > Fiona Tomkinson, and I talk about some ideas akin to this
in our > introduction to /Archives & Networks of Modernism/: > > >
http://www.theglobalreview.net/?page_id=11 __ > > All best, > > James > >
On 2015-05-15 10:04 AM, Bruce Redwine wrote: >> For > some reason I didn?t
get Richard Pine?s recent message (below) > to >> the ILDS Listserv.
Anyway, I agree with Ken?s > implications, namely, an >> author?s
intentions or motives bear > looking into. Seems to me it?s all >> fair
game, that is, how > one chooses to look at a piece of literature: >> as an
> autonomous unit in the spirit of the New Criticism (the ?Verbal > >>
Icon?) or as a creation deeply indebted to its creator and > his/her >>
motives (conscious or not). ?Sink or skim,? as > Durrell himself says. I >>
prefer to sink, but that?s simply my > preference. I can now hear Bill >>
Godshalk?s voice interrupting > me about the utter impossibility of >>
determining anyone?s > ?intentions.? >> >> Bruce >> >> >> >> >> >>> On May
15, 2015, at > 9:21 AM, Kennedy Gammage >>> __ __>> wrote: >>> >>> When he
> denied a connection to Wagner he was being defensive and >>> >
disingenuous, lying in other words - just like you know who was > wont >>>
to do! >>> >>> I enjoyed re-reading this piece from the > NYT about the
Wagner-Tolkien >>> connection: >>> > >
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2003/12/22/the-ring-and-the-rings > __
>>> >>> Cheers - Ken > > _______________________________________________ >
ILDS mailing > list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca  __ > >
https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds __ -------------- > next part
-------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: > __
------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Fri, 15 May > 2015 12:43:10
-0700 From: James Gifford __ To: > ilds at lists.uvic.ca  Subject: Re: >
[ilds] Of course Tolkien was not being truthful Message-ID: > <
55564C4E.50405 at gmail.com > > Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Hi > Bruce, I do think this is where we
disagree -- I don't have any > particular grudge against Tolkien for his
misdirections, and I > do think Durrell's contradictory truths are a
genuine > perspective. For instance, the passage you point to in the >
Quartet, and others like it, gesture to the unresolvable nature > of truth
when we live in a world made up of subjects observing > 'reality' from a
multitude of perspectives. As an example, did > Justine ever love Darley,
or was she merely using him as a blind > for her political interests, or
for Pursewarden? It's probably > not a question to be answered, since the
perspective changes it, > including Justine's retrospective
self-observations. I suspect > this is also the appeal of the popularized
notions of relativity > or quantum strangeness for Durrell -- there are
many > contradictory perspectives from which to view the world, but >
there's not "godly" position at the centre from which to sort > out
absolute truth, and likewise there's no fixed point at which > the
Enlightenment subject is eternally fixed, instead leaving > instead a
protean process of subjectivity in its place. There > are other lies as
well, such as Durrell's BBC years, which I see > as an occasional part of
his correspondences but a pervasive > part of his interviews. I suspect the
interviews are almost all > performance, and it would be speculation to ask
how much of the > bafflegab around the truth Durrell believed versus how
much was > a public persona for a private person. However, I personally >
don't pick up fiction to look for truth, or at least not in any >
conventional sense. I trust the telling more than the tale, if > that's a
fair way to put it, and the teller's involvement with > the telling & tale
is suspect. All best, James On 2015-05-15 > 12:19 PM, Bruce Redwine wrote:
> James, > > Yes, authors lie, > and so do many people. They do it for
various > reasons, some > excusable, some not. Durrell?s motives, however,
I find > > suspect. In fact, I think they?re pathological ? the man >
couldn?t > distinguish between truth and fiction, or chose not > to, and
then turned > that disposition into a philosophic > principle: ?Truth is
what most > contradicts itself in time.? In > Haag?s /City of Memory,/ Eve
Cohen says > this about him ? he?s > not to be trusted; he?s a storyteller.
Bill > Godshalk lying in > order to describe lying, if I understand
correctly, is > an > example of the ?liars paradox.? Statements about lying
? ?I am > > lying? ? are insolvable in terms of truth value, just as > >
Durrell?s/Balthazar?s statement about truth is contradictory. > Now, we >
can say this is a profound observation about the way > things are, or we >
can say there?s something wrong with the > person who says and believes >
it. I prefer the latter. > > > Bruce ------------------------------
Message: 3 Date: Fri, 15 > May 2015 20:36:39 +0000 From:
mail at durrelllibrarycorfu.org >  To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca >  Subject: Re:
[ilds] ILDS Digest, Vol > 97, Issue 14 Message-ID: __ Content-Type:
text/plain; > charset="us-ascii" Tolkien was too complicated to lie. RP >
-----Original Message----- From: ilds-request at lists.uvic.ca >  > [mailto:
ilds-request at lists.uvic.ca > ] Sent: Friday, May 15, 2015 > 03:01 PM To:
ilds at lists.uvic.ca  > Subject: ILDS Digest, Vol 97, Issue 14 Send ILDS
mailing list > submissions to ilds at lists.uvic.caTo subscribe or unsubscribe
via > the World Wide Web, visit >
https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ildsor, via email, send a > message
with subject or body 'help' to > ilds-request at lists.uvic.caYou can reach
the person managing the > list at ilds-owner at lists.uvic.caWhen replying,
please edit your > Subject line so it is more specificthan "Re: Contents of
ILDS > digest..."Today's Topics: 1. Re: ILDS Digest, Vol 97, Issue 13 > (
mail at durrelllibrarycorfu.org > ) 2. Re: Of course Tolkien > was not being
truthful (Bruce Redwine) 3. Re: Of course Tolkien > was not being truthful
(James > >
Gifford)----------------------------------------------------------------------Message:
> 1Date: Fri, 15 May 2015 08:04:05 +0000From: >
mail at durrelllibrarycorfu.orgTo: ilds at lists.uvic.caSubject: Re: > [ilds]
ILDS Digest, Vol 97, Issue 13Message-ID: Content-Type: > text/plain;
charset="us-ascii"Concerning the "origins" or > "models" for various
characters in fiction, there are,! of > course, many obvious sources for
LD's characters and many more > oblique. One has only to look at real-life
names of the Quartet > period such as Scobie and Maskelyne to realise this.
But I tend > to take Humphrey Carpenter's observation about searching for >
Tolkien's sources, that "one learns little by raking through a > compost
heap to see what dead plants originally went into it.Far > better to
observe its effect on the new and growing plants that > it is enriching".
Or Tolkien's own remark when asked whether his > "Lord of the Rings" and
Wagner's Nibelungelied had anything in > common: "both are round, and
that's where the similarity > ends".Richard PineDurrell Library of Corfu
-----Original > Message-----From: ilds-request at lists.uvic.ca >  > [mailto:
ilds-request at lists.uvic.ca > ]Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2015 > 03:00 PMTo:
ilds at lists.uvic.caSubject: ILDS Digest, Vol 97, > Issue 13Send ILDS mailing
list submissions to > ilds at lists.uvic.caTo subscribe or unsubscribe via the
World Wide > Web, visit https:/! /lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ildsor > ,
via email, send > a message with subject or body 'help' to >
ilds-request at lists.uvic.caYou can reach the person managing the > list at
ilds-owner at lists.uvic.caWhen replying, please edit your > Subject line so
it is more specificthan "Re: Contents of ILDS > digest..."Today's Topics:
1. photo solutions (Joe) 2. Durrell?s > Characters (Kennedy Gammage) 3. Re:
Durrell?s Characters (James > Gifford) 4. Re: ILDS Digest, Vol 97, Issue 12
> (mail at durrelllibrarycorfu.org > ) 5. Re: Durrell?s > Characters (Bruce
Redwine) 6. Re: ILDS Digest, Vol 97, Issue 12 > (Bruce > >
Redwine)----------------------------------------------------------------------Message:
> 1Date: Wed, 13 May 2015 18:41:28 +0200From: "Joe" To: >
ilds at lists.uvic.caSubject: [ilds] photo solutionsMessage-ID: > <
7456bdcc250f544e10eb4d7d522e5a47 at quora.com > >Content-Type: > text/plain; >
format=flowed; c! harset="UTF-8"Hope you are doing well!We > provide photo
editing:Ecommerce photos editing, jewelry photos > retouching, beauty and
skin imageretouching, etcQuality is > goodTurnaround time fastWe! are
7/24/365 availableYou may send > us a test photo to judge our quality.Best
regards,JoeEmail: > songedit at tom.com------------------------------Message:
2Date: > Wed, 13 May 2015 19:09:52 -0700From: Kennedy Gammage To: >
ilds at lists.uvic.caSubject: [ilds] Durrell?s > CharactersMessage-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="utf-8"I?m not widely read in Saul
Bellow (I enjoyed > Humbolt?s Gift, which lead meto Delmore Schwartz) but I
am > reading a lot about Bellow now because ofLeader?s new bio ? and >
there are some contrasts or parallels we can makewith our > friend. Louis
Menand?s YOUNG SAUL article in the May 11 issue > ofThe New Yorker says
?From the beginning, Bellow drew on people > he knew,including his wives
and girlfriends and the members of > his own family, forhis characters.?
Maybe this statement app! > lies to all writers (?write whatyou know?) ?
but I?m not sure it > applies to Durrell so much.How many characters are
there in the > Quartet, and how many can you draw aline to, linking a cha!
> racter to a person Durrell knew? We were justdiscussing Clea, > Justine
and Melissa ? but Durrell had a finite number ofwives, > and there are
literally dozens of characters. According to > Menand?sreview, ??Herzog? is
a revenge novel.? To a ridiculous > extent! Not only arethe characters
directly linked to > friends/wives/lovers ? but many of thesepeople
favorably > reviewed the novel, as if it didn?t apply to them.I really
think > Durrell is a different animal: someone who conjuredcharacters > out
of his head like Zeus! Who is the real Constance? Answerthat > and I?ll buy
you a drink at the next OMG!Cheers - > Ken-------------- next part
--------------An HTML attachment was > scrubbed...URL:
------------------------------Message: 3Date: > Wed, 13 May 2015 21:36:07
-0700From: James Gifford To: > ilds at lists.uvic.caSubject: Re: [ilds]
Durrell?s > CharactersMessage-ID: <55542637.2010307 at gm! ail.com >
>Content-Type:
text/plain; charset=windows-1252; > format=flowedOn 2015-05-13 7:09 PM,
Kennedy Gammage wrote:> Who > is the real Constance? Answer> that and I?ll
buy you a drink at > t! he next OMG!Lawrence Durrell?More seriously, enjoy
the > Bellow! Grand works to leap >
into.Best,James------------------------------Message: 4Date: > Thu, 14 May
2015 07:40:28 +0000From: > mail at durrelllibrarycorfu.orgTo:
ilds at lists.uvic.caSubject: Re: > [ilds] ILDS Digest, Vol 97, Issue
12Message-ID: Content-Type: > text/plain; charset="us-ascii"LDurrell's
recall of proper names > was both erratic and playful (he called "Travel
and Leisure" > "Tailor and Cutter" for example, - both exist of course) so
it's > possible that he did write (at least in his imagination) such an >
article. However, the idea that "relations" might have a sexual >
connotation is absurd. Does everyone who writes for "Foreign > Affairs"
think they are connubing exoterically? And I doubt very > much whether
shedding light on this student's query ! could add > significantly to a
reading of "Bitter Lemons" - that is merely > academic wishful
non-thinking.Richard PineDurrell Library of > Corfu-----Original
Message-----From: ilds-request! > @lists.uvic.ca  > [mailto:
ilds-request at lists.uvic.ca > ]Sent: Wednesday, May 13, > 2015 03:02 PMTo:
ilds at lists.uvic.caSubject: ILDS Digest, Vol 97, > Issue 12Send ILDS mailing
list submissions to > ilds at lists.uvic.caTo subscribe or unsubscribe via the
World Wide > Web, visit https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ildsor, via
> email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to >
ilds-request at lists.uvic.caYou can reach the person managing the > list at
ilds-owner at lists.uvic.caWhen replying, please edit your > Subject line so
it is more specificthan "Re: Contents of ILDS > digest..."Today's Topics:
1. query | Durrell on Cyprus & > international relations articles (James
Gifford) 2. Re: query | > Durrell on Cyprus & international relations
articles (Bruce > >
Redwine)----------------------------------------------------------------------Message:
> 1Date: Tue, 12 May 2015 22:50:06 -0700From: James Gi! fford To: > ILDS
Listserv Subject: [ilds] query | Durrell on Cyprus & > international
relations articlesMessage-ID: > <5552E60E.4000905 at gmail.com > >Content-Type:
text/plain; > charset=utf-8; ! format=flowedHello all,Does anyone have >
anything to suggest for this query, belo! w, from a graduate > student
working on diplomats & Cyprus? Please respond to the > Durrell listserv or
directly to me if you wish (I'm also copying > this to people not on the
listserv [sorry for any duplication]). > I'm glad to put anyone interested
in direct contact with the > student too. > In Bitter Lemons Durrell talks
about writing an > > article for an 'American Institute of > International
> Relations'. Do you know whether > this article is documented > anywhere?
I have > tried in collaboration with a couple of > > librarians here at
Harvard to identify the > Institute in > question and any relevant archives
> but have been > unsuccessful.The passage in question reads: "I was
commissioned > to write a series of articles on the iss! ue [of British >
misunderstandings of the Greekness of Cyprus] for an American > Institute
of International Relations bulletin - a distasteful > task, for I dislike
writing about politi! cs. Yet the money > would buy me a door and a window
for the balcony room, and I > knew ! no better way of earning it."My
personal suspicion is > that this is tongue in cheek (international
"relations"): a > reference to LD's Antrobus stories for Playboy magazine,
which > paid very well at the time... That said, I would be absolutely >
delighted to be proven wrong and for some new texts to come to > light!
They might, of course, also be unpublished, if they > exist. Work on this
specific topic could significant shape > readings of /Bitter Lemons/.Any
suggestions are greatly > appreciated, and please do share with everyone.
I'll make sure > any listserv comments are forwarded on.All >
best,James------------------------------Message: 2Date: Wed, 13 > May 2015
07:02:13 -0700From: Bruce Redwine To: > james.d.gifford at gmail.com , >
ilds at lists.uvic.caCc: Bruce Redwine Subject: Re: [ilds] query | > Durrell
o! n Cyprus & international relations > articlesMessage-ID: > <
50CE571F-FD16-4909-A1D2-C92CA56694B8 at earthlink.net >  >>Content-Type: >
text/plain; charset="utf-8"I agree with James. Durrell?s! > reference to an
?American Institute of International Relations? > is most likely bogus. T!
he graduate student?s assumptions, > however, are instructive. He or she
quite reasonably assumes > that Durrell?s travel book is based on fact. As
has been > discussed before on this Listserv, much of Durrell?s travel >
literature is invented, and here I include everything from > Prospero?s
Cell to Caesar?s Vast Ghost. He likes to tell a good > story and has no
qualms about embellishing his narrative with > invented ?facts.? Why an
?American Institute of International > Relations?? The reference supports
his bona fides as an > experienced diplomat and anticipates his work at the
British > embassy on Cyprus as a ?Public Relations? director. A sexual pun
> on ?relations,? as James suggests, may also be at work.Bruce> On > May
12, 2015, ! at 10:50 PM, James Gifford wrote:> > Hello all,> > > Does
anyone have anything to suggest for this query, below, > from a graduate
student working on diplomats & Cyprus? Please > re! spond to the Durrell
listserv or directly to me if you wish > (I'm also copying this to peopl! e
not on the listserv [sorry > for any duplication]). I'm glad to put anyone
interested in > direct contact with the student too.> > > In Bitter Lemons
> Durrell talks about writing an> > article for an 'American > Institute
of> > International Relations'. Do you know whether> > > this article is
documented anywhere? I have> > tried in > collaboration with a couple of> >
librarians here at Harvard to > identify the> > Institute in question and
any relevant archives> > > but have been unsuccessful.> > The passage in
question reads: > "I was commissioned to write a series of articles on the
issue > [of British misunderstandings of the Greekness of Cyprus] for an >
American Institute of International Relations bulletin - a > distasteful
task, for I dislike writing about politics. Yet the > money would buy me !
a door and a window for the balcony room, > and I knew no better way of
earning it."> > My personal > suspicion is that this is tongue in cheek
(international > "relations"): a re! ference to LD's Antrobus stories for
Playboy > magazine, which paid very well at the time... That! said, I >
would be absolutely delighted to be proven wrong and for some > new texts
to come to light! They might, of course, also be > unpublished, if they
exist. Work on this specific topic could > significant shape readings of
/Bitter Lemons/.> > Any > suggestions are greatly appreciated, and please
do share with > everyone. I'll make sure any listserv comments are
forwarded > on.> > All 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: >
------------------------------Subject: Digest >
Footer_______________________________________________ILDS > mailing list! >
ILDS at lists.uvic.cahttps:// >
lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds------------------------------End > < >
http://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds------------------------------End
> > > of ILDS Digest, Vol 97, Issue >
12************************************--------! ------ next part >
--------------An HTML attachment was scrubbed...URL: >
------------------------------Message: 5Date: Thu, 14 May 2015 > 07:53:45
-0700From: Bruce Redwine To: ilds at lists.uvic.caCc: > Bruce Redwine Subject:
Re: [ilds] Durrell?s > CharactersMessage-ID: > <
920EB077-932A-45D6-A964-33FF62E22A54 at earthlink.net >  >>Content-Type: >
text/plain; charset="utf-8"Charles Dickens is usually praised > for the
variety and profusion of his characterizations. I don?t > think of Durrell
as another Dickens. His many characterizations > seem connected, seem to
have a common origin. So we have Count > D. Durrell once joked in an
interview that he himself was > Justine. Was it entirely a joke? Sappho
Jane saw herself as the > prototype for Livia. Here we may have
characterization by > consanguinity. I would argue (and have) that even
subsidiary > characters such as Da Capo, Toto de Brunel, and Memlik Pasha >
have asp! ects of their creator. Perhaps the ?old pirate? and > his
?tendencies? should also be included. And maybe old LD is > the ?real
Constance.? That may have appealed to Sappho ! > Jane.Bruce> On May 13,
2015, at 7:09 PM, Kennedy Gammage wrote:> > > I?m not widely read in Saul
Bellow (I enjoyed Humbolt?s Gift, > which lead me to Delmore Schwartz) but
I am reading a lot about > Bellow now because of Leader?s new bio ? and
there are some > contrasts or parallels we can make with our friend. Louis
> Menand?s YOUNG SAUL article in the May 11 issue of The New > Yorker says
?From the beginning, Bellow drew on people he knew, > including his wives
and girlfriends and the members of his own > family, for his characters.?
Maybe this statement applies to all > writers (?write what you know?) ? but
I?m not sure it applies to > Durrell so much.> > How many characters are
there in the > Quartet, and how many can you draw a line to, linking a >
character to a person Durrell knew? We were just discussing > Clea, Justine
and ! Melissa ? but Durrell had a finite number of > wives, and there are
literally dozens of characters. According > to Menand?s review, ??Herzog?
is a revenge novel.? To a ridi! > culous extent! Not only are the
characters directly linked to > friends/wives/lovers ? but many of these
people favorably > reviewed the novel, as if it didn?t apply to them.> > I
really > think Durrell is a different animal: someone who conjured >
characters out of his head like Zeus! Who is the real Constance? > Answer
that and I?ll buy you a drink at the next OMG!> > Cheers > - Ken> >
_______________________________________________> ILDS > mailing list>
ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > >
https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds-------------- next > part
--------------An HTML attachment was scrubbed...URL: >
------------------------------Message: 6Date: Thu, 14 May 2015 > 08:21:54
-0700From: Bruce Redwine To: ilds at lists.uvic.caCc: > Bruce Redwine Subject:
Re: [ilds] ILDS Digest, Vol 97, Issue > 12Message-ID: > <
4C349BFB-D0AE-46C2-9D61-224961D1FA69 at earthlink.net >  >>Content-Type: >
text/plain; charset="utf-8"In American ! English, the plural > noun
relations has a definite sexual connotation. ?Dick and Jane > have
relations? connotes sexual activity. I could not, however, > find that
sense i! n the OED. It doesn?t seem farfetched to me > that Durrell was
aware of this sexual sense, and it would seem > to appeal to his sense of
humor, especially when applied to > diplomacy.Bruce> On May 14, 2015, at
12:40 AM, > mail at durrelllibrarycorfu.org >  wrote:> > LDurrell's > recall
of proper names was both erratic and playful (he called > "Travel and
Leisure" "Tailor and Cutter" for example, - both > exist of course) so it's
possible that he did write (at least in > his imagination) such an article.
However, the idea that > "relations" might have a sexual connotation is
absurd. Does > everyone who writes for "Foreign Affairs" think they are >
connubing exoterically? And I doubt very much whether shedding > light on
this student's query could add significantly to a > reading of "Bitter
Lemons" - that is merely academic wishful > non-thinking! .> Richard Pine>
Durrell Library of Corfu> > -----Original Message-----> From:
ilds-request at lists.uvic.ca >  > [mailto:ilds-request at lists.uvic.ca > ]>
Sent: Wednesday, May 13! , > 2015 03:02 PM> To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca > >
Subject: ILDS Digest, Vol 97, Issue > 12> > Send ILDS mailing list
submissions to ilds at lists.uvic.ca >  To subscribe or unsubscribe via the >
World Wide Web, visit > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds or, via
email, send > a message with subject or body 'help' to >
ilds-request at lists.uvic.ca  > You can reach the person managing the list at
> ilds-owner at lists.uvic.ca  When > replying, please edit your Subject line
so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of ILDS digest..." Today's
Topics: 1. query | > Durrell on Cyprus & international relations articles
(James > Gifford) 2. Re: query | Durrell on Cyprus & international >
relations articles (Bruce Redwine) > >
---------------------------------------------------------------------- >
Message: 1 Date: Tue, 12 May 2015 22:50:06 -0700 From: James > Gifford To:
ILDS Listserv Subject: [ilds] query | Durrell on > Cyprus & intern! ational
relations articles Message-ID: > <5552E60E.4000905 at gmail.com > >
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Hello > all, Does
anyone have anything to! suggest for! this query, > below, from a graduate
student working on diplomats & Cyprus? > Please respond to the Durrell
listserv or directly to me if you > wish (I'm also copying this to people
not on the listserv [sorry > for any duplication]). I'm glad to put anyone
interested in > direct contact with the student too. > In Bitter Lemons
Durrell > talks about writing an > article for an 'American Institute of >
> International Relations'. Do you know whether > this article is >
documented anywhere? I have > tried in collaboration with a > couple of >
librarians here at Harvard to identify the > > Institute in question and
any relevant archives > but have been > unsuccessful. The passage in
question reads: "I was commissioned > to write a series of articles on the
issue [of British > misunderstandings of the Greekness of Cyprus] for an
Am! erican > Institute of International Relations bulletin - a distasteful
> task, for I dislike writing about politics. Yet the money would > buy me
a door and a window ! for the balcony! room, and I knew > no better way of
earning it." My personal suspicion is that this > is tongue in cheek
(international "relations"): a reference to > LD's Antrobus stories for
Playboy magazine, which paid very well > at the time... That said, I would
be absolutely delighted to be > proven wrong and for some new texts to come
to light! They > might, of course, also be unpublished, if they exist. Work
on > this specific topic could significant shape readings of /Bitter >
Lemons/. Any suggestions are greatly appreciated, and please do > share
with everyone. I'll make sure any listserv comments are > forwarded on. All
best, James ------------------------------ > Message: 2 Date: Wed, 13 May
2015 07:02:13 -0700 From: Bruce > Redwine To: james.d.gifford at gmail.com > ,
ilds at lists.uvic.ca >  Cc: Bruce Redwine Subject: Re: > [ilds] query |
Durrell on Cyprus & international relations > articles Message-ID: <50CE5!
> 71F-FD16-4909-A1D2-C92CA56694B8 at earthlink.net > > > Content-Type:
text/plain; charset="utf-8" I agree with James. > Durrell?s reference to an
?American Institute of ! International > Rela! tions? is most likely bogus.
The graduate student?s > assumptions, however, are instructive. He or she
quite > reasonably assumes that Durrell?s travel book is based on fact. >
As has been discussed before on this Listserv, much of Durrell?s > travel
literature is invented, and here I include everything > from Prospero?s
Cell to Caesar?s Vast Ghost. He likes to tell a > good story and has no
qualms about embellishing his narrative > with invented ?facts.? Why an
?American Institute of > International Relations?? The reference supports
his bona fides > as an experienced diplomat and anticipates his work at the
> British embassy on Cyprus as a ?Public Relations? director. A > sexual
pun on ?relations,? as James suggests, may also be at > work. Bruce > On
May 12, 2015, at 10:50 PM, James Gifford wrote: > > > Hello all, > > Does!
anyone have anything to suggest for > this query, below, from a graduate
student working on diplomats > & Cyprus? Please respond to the Durrell
listserv or dire! ctly > to me if you wis! h (I'm also copying this to
people not on the > listserv [sorry for any duplication]). I'm glad to put
anyone > interested in direct contact with the student too. > > > In >
Bitter Lemons Durrell talks about writing an > > article for an > 'American
Institute of > > International Relations'. Do you know > whether > > this
article is documented anywhere? I have > > > tried in collaboration with a
couple of > > librarians here at > Harvard to identify the > > Institute in
question and any > relevant archives > > but have been unsuccessful. > >
The > passage in question reads: "I was commissioned to write a series > of
articles on the issue [of British misunderstandings of the > Greekness of
Cyprus] for an American Institute of International > Relations bulletin - a
distasteful task, for I dislike writing > about politics. Yet the money
would buy me a door and a window > for the balcony room, and ! I knew no
better way of earning it." > > > My personal suspicion is that this is
tongue in cheek > (international "relations"): a reference to LD's Antrobus
st! > ories for Playboy magazin! e, which paid very well at the > time...
That said, I would be absolutely delighted to be proven > wrong and for
some new texts to come to light! They might, of > course, also be
unpublished, if they exist. Work on this > specific topic could significant
shape readings of /Bitter > Lemons/. > > Any suggestions are greatly
appreciated, and please > do share with everyone. I'll make sure any
listserv comments are > forwarded on. > > All 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: > ------------------------------ Subject: Digest Footer >
_______________________________________________ ILDS mailing > list
ILDS at lists.uvic.ca  https://lis! > ts.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds >  >
------------------------------ End of ILDS Digest, Vol 97, Issue > 12
************************************> ______________! >
_________________________________> ILDS mailing list> > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca >
> https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds-------------- next > part
--------------An HTML attachment was scrubbed...URL: >
------------------------------Subject: Digest >
Footer_______________________________________________ILDS > mailing >
listILDS at lists.uvic.cahttps:// >
lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds------------------------------End > < >
http://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds------------------------------End
> > > of ILDS Digest, Vol 97, Issue >
13************************************-------------- next part >
--------------An HTML attachment was scrubbed...URL: >
------------------------------Message: 2Date: Fri, 15 May 2015 > 10:04:32
-0700From: Bruce Redwine To: Durrell list Cc: Ken > Gammage , Bruce Redwine
, David Green Subject: Re: [ilds] Of > course Tolkien was not being
truthfulMessage-ID: > <116B8DD9-F24A-4DD5-AD34-2CE7B830BD37 at earthlink.net >
>>Content-Type: > text/plain; charset="utf-8"For some reason I didn?t get
Richard > Pine?s recent message (below) to the ILDS Listserv. Anyway, I >
agree with Ken?s implications, namely, an author?s intentions or > motives
bear looki! ng into. Seems to me it?s all fair game, > that is, how one
chooses to look at a piece of literature: as an > autonomous unit in the
spirit of the New Criticism (the ?Verbal > Icon?) or as a creation deeply
indebted to its creator and > his/her motives (conscious or not). ?Sink or
skim,? as Durrell > himself says. I prefer to sink, but that?s simply my
preference. > I can now hear Bill Godshalk?s voice interrupting me about
the > utter impossibility of determining anyone?s ?intentions.?Bruce> > On
May 15, 2015, at 9:21 AM, Kennedy Gammage wrote:> > When he > denied a
connection to Wagner he was being defensive and > disingenuous, lying in
other words - just like you know who was > wont to do!> > I enjoyed
re-reading this piece from the NYT > about the Wagner-Tolkien connection: >
> > http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2003/12/22/the-ring-and-the-rings > >
> Cheers - Ken> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------> > From: >> Date:
Fri, May 15, 2015 at 1:04 AM> Subject: Re: [ilds] > ILDS Digest, Vol 97,
Issue! 13> To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca >  > > > Concerning the "origins" or >
"models" for various characters in fiction, there are, of > course, many
obvious sources for LD's characters and many more > oblique. One has only
to look at real-life names of the Quartet > period such as Scobie and
Maskelyne to realise this. But I tend > to take Humphrey Carpenter's
observation about searching for > Tolkien's sources, that "one learns
little by raking through a > compost heap to see what dead plants
originally went into it.Far > better to observe its effect on the new and
growing plants that > it is enriching". Or Tolkien's own remark when asked
whether his > "Lord of the Rings" and Wagner's Nibelungelied had anything
in > common: "both are round, and that's where the similarity ends".> >
Richard Pine> -------------- next part --------------An HTML > attachment
was scrubbed...URL: > ------------------------------Message: 3Date: Fri, 15
May 2015 > 10:42:48 -0700From: James Gifford To: ilds at lists.uvic.caSubject:
> Re: [ilds] Of course Tolkien was not being truthfulMessage-ID: >
<55563018.9080200 at g! mail.com >Content-Type: > text/plain;
charset=windows-1252; format=flowedHi Bruce,Check > your spam folder -- I
just checked mine in gmail, and the > message was there (likely either the
email address has been > flagged for some reason or else the quoting of the
entire digest > set off the filter).As for Tolkien, he also maintained the
wars > didn't influence the books, which is just as ridiculous as > saying
Wagner has no kinship. A good friend wrote his honours > thesis on Tolkien
and has always told me to distrust the author, > but Charles Sligh is our
resident expert on ents, Porius, and > all things fantastical.I'm reminded
of an exchange of letters I > had with Mary Stewart, asking if there was
any influence from > Durrell on her Corfu novel -- she said no, but isn't
Durrell > fascinating for.... and then it went into a demonstration of >
just how closely she'd been reading Old D.Authors lie. So do > most people.
And intentions change in retrospect. I wish I could > read Bill tapping out
a lie to des! cribe an author lying... One > can simply think of Durrell's
interview with Muggeridge on the > BCC CD of Durrell recordings from the
centenary -- something to > the effect of "During my years with the BBC"
followed by "And > when was that, Larry?" Of course there were none...But
even > Durrell's advice in /Personal Landscape/ (the section we've >
already discussed in /Elephant/) sets the poet, public, and poem > as
distinct entities. I can't imagine he'd feel different about > fiction. The
poet's interests are not the same as the public's > nor the poem's and have
no greater (or lesser) force > either.James Clawson, Fiona Tomkinson, and I
talk about some > ideas akin to this in our introduction to /Archives &
Networks > of Modernism/:http://www.theglobalreview.net/?page_id=11All >
best,JamesOn 2015-05-15 10:04 AM, Bruce Redwine wrote:> For some > reason I
didn?t get Richard Pine?s recent message (below) to> > the ILDS Listserv.
Anyway, I agree with Ken?s implications, > namely, an> author?s intentions
or motives bear looking into. > Seems to me it?s all> fair game, that is,
h! ow one chooses to > look at a piece of literature:> as an autonomous
unit in the > spirit of the New Criticism (the ?Verbal> Icon?) or as a >
creation deeply indebted to its creator and his/her> motives > (conscious
or not). ?Sink or skim,? as Durrell himself says. I> > prefer to sink, but
that?s simply my preference. I can now hear > Bill> Godshalk?s voice
interrupting me about the utter > impossibility of> determining anyone?s
?intentions.?>> > Bruce>>>>>>> On May 15, 2015, at 9:21 AM, Kennedy
Gammage>> > > wrote:>>>> When he denied a connection to Wagner he was being
> defensive and>> disingenuous, lying in other words - just like > you know
who was wont>> to do!>>>> I enjoyed re-reading this > piece from the NYT
about the Wagner-Tolkien>> connection:>> > >
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2003/12/22/the-ring-and-the-rings>>>> >
Cheers - Ken------------------------------Subject: Digest >
Footer_______________________________________________ILDS > mailing listILDS
@lists.uvic.cahttps://lists.uvic.ca/mailm > ! >
an/listinfo/ilds------------------------------End of ILDS > Digest, Vol 97,
Issue 14************************************ > -------------- next part
-------------- An HTML attachment was > scrubbed... URL: __
------------------------------ Message: 4 > Date: Sat, 16 May 2015 09:26:41
+1000 From: __ To: Durrell list > __, Bruce Redwine __ Cc: Ken Gammage __
Subject: Re: [ilds] Of > course Tolkien was not being truthful Message-ID:
> <20150515232641.DII9M.7093.root at nschwwebs04p> Content-Type: > text/plain;
charset=utf-8 Tolkien, whose work I enjoy, told > enormous porky pies. What
I never bought was that LoTR was not > an allegory. Yeah, sure mate. But it
is the story that matters. > writers are very fond of smokescreens. Dylan
Thomas once said > 'confuse the bastards'. David ---- Bruce Redwine __
wrote: > For > some reason I didn?t get Richard Pine?s recent message
(below) > to the ILDS Listserv. Anyway, I agree with Ken?s implications, >
namely, an author?s intentions or motives bear looking into. > Seems to me
it?s all fair game, that is, how one chooses to look > at a piece of
literature: as an autonomous unit in the spirit of > the New Criticism (the
?Verbal Icon?) or as a creation deeply > indebted to its creator and
his/her motives (conscious or not). > ?Sink or skim,? as Durrell himself
says. I prefer to sink, but > that?s simply my preference. I can now hear
Bill Godshalk?s > voice interrupting me about the utter impossibility of >
determining anyone?s ?intentions.? > > Bruce > > > > > > > On > May 15,
2015, at 9:21 AM, Kennedy Gammage __ wrote: > > > > When > he denied a
connection to Wagner he was being defensive and > disingenuous, lying in
other words - just like you know who was > wont to do! > > > > I enjoyed
re-reading this piece from the NYT > about the Wagner-Tolkien connection: >
> > > http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2003/12/22/the-ring-and-the-rings >
__ > > > > Cheers - Ken > > > > ---------- Forwarded message > ---------- >
> From: __> > > Date: Fri, May 15, 2015 at 1:04 AM > > > Subject: Re:
[ilds] ILDS Digest, Vol 97, Issue 13 > > To: > ilds at lists.uvic.ca  __ > > >
> > > > Concerning the "origins" or "models" for various characters in >
fiction, there are, of course, many obvious sources for LD's > characters
and many more oblique. One has only to look at > real-life names of the
Quartet period such as Scobie and > Maskelyne to realise this. But I tend
to take Humphrey > Carpenter's observation about searching for Tolkien's
sources, > that "one learns little by raking through a compost heap to see
> what dead plants originally went into it.Far better to observe > its
effect on the new and growing plants that it is enriching". > Or Tolkien's
own remark when asked whether his "Lord of the > Rings" and Wagner's
Nibelungelied had anything in common: "both > are round, and that's where
the similarity ends". > > Richard > Pine > > >
------------------------------ Message: 5 Date: Fri, > 15 May 2015 17:54:25
-0700 From: Bruce Redwine __ To: > ilds at lists.uvic.ca  Cc: Bruce Redwine >
__, David Green __ Subject: Re: [ilds] Of course Tolkien was not > being
truthful Message-ID: > <5382142F-B2CE-4259-B00C-BB0DFB01D1BC at earthlink.net
> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" David, Interesting > what
you say about allegory. I haven?t read Tolkien?s Ring, but > I once
submitted a novel with a religious theme (or what I > thought was one) to a
Catholic publisher and was duly rejected > because the editor didn?t find
it religious. She then said I > should read Tolkien for his religious
content. I should have > recommended to her The Dark Labyrinth or perhaps
Monsieur. Bruce > > On May 15, 2015, at 4:26 PM, dtart at bigpond.net.au >
wrote: > > Tolkien, whose work I > enjoy, told enormous porky pies. What I
never bought was that > LoTR was not an allegory. Yeah, sure mate. But it
is the story > that matters. writers are very fond of smokescreens. Dylan >
Thomas once said 'confuse the bastards'. > > David > > > ---- > Bruce
Redwine __> wrote: >> For some reason I didn?t get Richard > Pine?s recent
message (below) to the ILDS Listserv. Anyway, I > agree with Ken?s
implications, namely, an author?s intentions or > motives bear looking
into. Seems to me it?s all fair game, that > is, how one chooses to look at
a piece of literature: as an > autonomous unit in the spirit of the New
Criticism (the ?Verbal > Icon?) or as a creation deeply indebted to its
creator and > his/her motives (conscious or not). ?Sink or skim,? as
Durrell > himself says. I prefer to sink, but that?s simply my preference.
> I can now hear Bill Godshalk?s voice interrupting me about the > utter
impossibility of determining anyone?s ?intentions.? >> >> > Bruce >> >> >>
>> >> >>> On May 15, 2015, at 9:21 AM, Kennedy > Gammage __ wrote: >>> >>>
When he denied a connection to Wagner > he was being defensive and
disingenuous, lying in other words - > just like you know who was wont to
do! >>> >>> I enjoyed > re-reading this piece from the NYT about the
Wagner-Tolkien > connection: >>> > >
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2003/12/22/the-ring-and-the-rings > ____>
>>> >>> Cheers - Ken >>> >>> ---------- Forwarded message > ---------- >>>
From: __ __>> >>> Date: Fri, May 15, 2015 at 1:04 > AM >>> Subject: Re:
[ilds] ILDS Digest, Vol 97, Issue 13 >>> To: > ilds at lists.uvic.ca  __ __>
>>> >>> > >>> Concerning the "origins" or "models" for various characters >
in fiction, there are, of course, many obvious sources for LD's >
characters and many more oblique. One has only to look at > real-life names
of the Quartet period such as Scobie and > Maskelyne to realise this. But I
tend to take Humphrey > Carpenter's observation about searching for
Tolkien's sources, > that "one learns little by raking through a compost
heap to see > what dead plants originally went into it.Far better to
observe > its effect on the new and growing plants that it is enriching". >
Or Tolkien's own remark when asked whether his "Lord of the > Rings" and
Wagner's Nibelungelied had anything in common: "both > are round, and
that's where the similarity ends". >>> Richard > Pine >>> >> > >
_______________________________________________ > > ILDS mailing list >
ILDS at lists.uvic.ca >  __ > > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds __
-------------- > next part -------------- An HTML attachment was
scrubbed... URL: > __ ------------------------------ Message: 6 Date: Sat,
16 May > 2015 08:05:45 +0530 From: Sumantra Nag __ To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca > ,
James Gifford __ Cc: Bruce Redwine > __, Richard Pine __ Subject: Re:
[ilds] Of course Tolkien was > not being truthful Message-ID: __
Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="utf-8" I found Richard's comments
appearing not as > individual posts but as a quoted thread. As James
pointed out > portions from a Digest seem to have appeared with individual
> messages. With help from James I have just switched from the > Digest
form for ILDS messages to individual messages in order to > avoid quoting a
thread of messages from a Digest. Of course one > can edit a reply by
manually excluding unrequired portions from > a Digest, which is what I
have been trying to do, but it is > easier and more focussed to reply to
individual posts. Long ago, > Richard Pine rather brusquely asked me on
ILDS, to "stop sending > 29 page messages". I suspect what was happening
was, that the > ever increasing list of posts on a Digest was being
reproduced > with every one of my responses! I began to look at my
responses > more carefully thereafter, in order to manually exclude
unwanted > portions of the thread. Is Richard's current post a prey to a >
similar problem, but on a smaller scale? Sumantra Sent from my > Samsung
Tab On 15 May 2015 23:13, "James Gifford" __ wrote: > Hi > Bruce, > > Check
your spam folder -- I just checked mine in > gmail, and the message > was
there (likely either the email > address has been flagged for some reason >
or else the quoting > of the entire digest set off the filter). > > As for
Tolkien, he > also maintained the wars didn't influence the books, > which
is > just as ridiculous as saying Wagner has no kinship. A good > friend >
wrote his honours thesis on Tolkien and has always told > me to distrust
the > author, but Charles Sligh is our resident > expert on ents, Porius,
and all > things fantastical. > > I'm > reminded of an exchange of letters
I had with Mary Stewart, > asking if > there was any influence from Durrell
on her Corfu > novel -- she said no, but > isn't Durrell fascinating
for.... > and then it went into a demonstration of > just how closely >
she'd been reading Old D. > > Authors lie. So do most people. > And
intentions change in retrospect. I > wish I could read Bill > tapping out a
lie to describe an author lying... > One can > simply think of Durrell's
interview with Muggeridge on the BCC > CD > of Durrell recordings from the
centenary -- something to > the effect of > "During my years with the BBC"
followed by "And > when was that, Larry?" Of > course there were none... >
> But > even Durrell's advice in /Personal Landscape/ (the section we've >
> already discussed in /Elephant/) sets the poet, public, and > poem as >
distinct entities. I can't imagine he'd feel different > about fiction. The
> poet's interests are not the same as the > public's nor the poem's and
have > no greater (or lesser) force > either. > > James Clawson, Fiona
Tomkinson, and I talk about > some ideas akin to this > in our introduction
to /Archives & > Networks of Modernism/: > > >
http://www.theglobalreview.net/?page_id=11 > > All best, > James > > > On
2015-05-15 10:04 AM, Bruce Redwine wrote: > >> For some > reason I didn?t
get Richard Pine?s recent message (below) to >> > the ILDS Listserv.
Anyway, I agree with Ken?s implications, > namely, an >> author?s
intentions or motives bear looking into. > Seems to me it?s all >> fair
game, that is, how one chooses to > look at a piece of literature: >> as an
autonomous unit in the > spirit of the New Criticism (the ?Verbal >> Icon?)
or as a > creation deeply indebted to its creator and his/her >> motives >
(conscious or not). ?Sink or skim,? as Durrell himself says. I > >> prefer
to sink, but that?s simply my preference. I can now > hear Bill >>
Godshalk?s voice interrupting me about the utter > impossibility of >>
determining anyone?s ?intentions.? >> >> > Bruce >> >> >> >> >> >> On May
15, 2015, at 9:21 AM, Kennedy > Gammage >>> __> wrote: >>> >>> When he
denied a connection to > Wagner he was being defensive and >>>
disingenuous, lying in > other words - just like you know who was wont >>>
to do! >>> >>> > I enjoyed re-reading this piece from the NYT about the >
Wagner-Tolkien >>> connection: >>> > >
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2003/12/22/the-ring-and-the-rings > >>>
>>> Cheers - Ken >>> >> > _______________________________________________ >
ILDS mailing > list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca  > >
https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > -------------- > next part
-------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: > __
------------------------------ Message: 7 Date: Fri, 15 May > 2015 20:06:09
-0700 From: James Gifford __ To: > ilds at lists.uvic.ca  Subject: [ilds] >
missing messages & digest options Message-ID: > <5556B421.2010708 at gmail.com >
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed I'm > fairly
certain that's what's happening -- the second message was > also in my
gmail spam folder. Any subscribers who wish to can > change their
subscription preferences by following either the > instructions in the
welcome email or by entering their email > address and selecting the
"Unsubscribe or edit options" button > on the ILDS website:
https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > Cheers, James On 2015-05-15
7:35 PM, Sumantra Nag wrote: > I > found Richard's comments appearing not
as individual posts but > as a > quoted thread. As James pointed out
portions from a > Digest seem to have > appeared with individual messages.
> > > With help from James I have just switched from the Digest form > for
ILDS > messages to individual messages in order to avoid > quoting a thread
of > messages from a Digest. Of course one can > edit a reply by manually >
excluding unrequired portions from a > Digest, which is what I have been >
trying to do, but it is > easier and more focussed to reply to individual >
posts. > > > Long ago, Richard Pine rather brusquely asked me on ILDS, to >
"stop > sending 29 page messages". I suspect what was happening > was, that
the > ever increasing list of posts on a Digest was > being reproduced with
> every one of my responses! I began to > look at my responses more >
carefully thereafter, in order to > manually exclude unwanted portions of >
the thread. > > Is > Richard's current post a prey to a similar problem,
but on a > smaller > scale? > > Sumantra > > Sent from my Samsung Tab >
------------------------------ Message: 8 Date: Sat, 16 May 2015 > 10:34:12
+0530 From: Sumantra Nag __ To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca >  Cc: Bruce Redwine __
Subject: Re: > [ilds] Durrell?s Characters Message-ID: __ Content-Type: >
text/plain; charset="utf-8" Bruce! That's a lot of characters > bearing
some aspect of Lawrence Durrell's mental or physical > makeup. Scobie?!
Forgive me for sounding a bit bewildered. I > read somewhere that Scobie's
character was derived - partly at > least - from an eccentric in Cairo whom
Durrell was familiar > with. And Da Capo appears to symbolise a predatory
lecher in > whom Durrell projects characteristics of familiar males in >
Alexandria. In Justine and the AQ, Da Capo is supposed to have > raped
Justine in her adolescence. But Haag's book describes a > similar
experience in the life of Elizabeth David, who, rightly > perhaps, has been
mentioned in these recent posts as a person on > whom Durrell has drawn
while creating Justine. Based on > references I made my from Michael Haag's
book on Alexandria > (City of Memory) I wrote at some length in The
Guardian > discussion of 2012 that Durrell seems to have transposed some of
> the conduct of British people resident in Alexandria during the > 1940s
and WWII on to the indigenous population of Alexandria. > Sumantra Sent
from my Asus Zenfone Charles Dickens is usually > praised for the variety
and profusion of his characterizations. > I don?t think of Durrell as
another Dickens. His many > characterizations seem connected, seem to have
a common origin. > So we have Count D. Durrell once joked in an interview
that he > himself was Justine. Was it entirely a joke? Sappho Jane saw >
herself as the prototype for Livia. Here we may have > characterization by
consanguinity. I would argue (and have) that > even subsidiary characters
such as Da Capo, Toto de Brunel, and > Memlik Pasha have aspects of their
creator. Perhaps the ?old > pirate? and his ?tendencies? should also be
included. And maybe > old LD *is* the ?real Constance.? That may have
appealed to > Sappho Jane. Bruce On May 13, 2015, at 7:09 PM, Kennedy
Gammage > __ wrote: I?m not widely read in Saul Bellow (I enjoyed >
Humbolt?s Gift, which lead me to Delmore Schwartz) but I am > reading a lot
about Bellow now because of Leader?s new bio ? and > there are some
contrasts or parallels we can make with our > friend. Louis Menand?s YOUNG
SAUL article in the May 11 issue of > The New Yorker says ?From the
beginning, Bellow drew on people > he knew, including his wives and
girlfriends and the members of > his own family, for his characters.? Maybe
this statement > applies to all writers (?write what you know?) ? but I?m
not > sure it applies to Durrell so much. How many characters are > there
in the Quartet, and how many can you draw a line to, > linking a character
to a person Durrell knew? We were just > discussing Clea, Justine and
Melissa ? but Durrell had a finite > number of wives, and there are
literally dozens of characters. > According to Menand?s review, ??Herzog?
is a revenge novel.? To > a ridiculous extent! Not only are the characters
directly linked > to friends/wives/lovers ? but many of these people
favorably > reviewed the novel, as if it didn?t apply to t ...
-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:  ------------------------------ Message: 9 Date: Mon, 18 May 2015
08:56:45 +0530 From: Sumantra Nag  To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca Cc: Ken Gammage ,
Ron


_______________________________________________
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/20150519/e6bd0263/attachment-0001.html>