[ilds] Reality v. Fiction

[Bruce Redwine]

Sorry, Richard, but I don’t understand your argument.  These examples fall flat.  It seems to me you’re ignoring the obvious fact of Durrell’s plagiarism and doing cartwheels to excuse some of his dubious habits, to say the least.

James can speak for himself.   But I don’t think anyone can presume to understand Lawrence Durrell best.

Bruce



> On Jan 1, 2016, at 1:05 PM, mail at durrelllibrarycorfu.org wrote:
> 
> Two points: 
> 1) IN relation to a comment by Bruce Redwine: "this is the crux of my disagreement with Richard. Because he doesn?t distinguish between reality and fiction, he doesn?t believe in plagiarism and refuses to acknowledge it. " - you are confusing (or delberately conflating) two of my remarks: no, I DO distinguish between reality and fiction, but I insist that the two can and do merge. If you stand on the platform at Paddington Station waiting for a 4.50 train and it doesn't exist, that is because you are CONFUSING fact and fiction. If, however, you read a book and it suddenly makes you realise the TRUTH of what it is saying, that demonstrates that  the real and the imagined DO sometimes converge. If that hasn't happened to you, I feel very sorry for you and DON'T dress it all up in a load of theory that isn't applicable to LD because he never heard of it and didn't want to.
> 2) A remark by our resident theorist Dr  Gifford: "The prevalence of fragmentation among the high moderns shapes, I'd argue, Durrell's sense of "truth" in the singular" --- BULLSHIT - high octane bovine effluent. That is one ofthe most remarkable instances of academic high-minded hot-air  rubbish I have ever seen. NOTHING "shaped" LD's "sense of truth" other than his own imagination as an unreconstructed protestant, Stop talking about what you clearly do not understand.
> RP
> 
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20160101/586288f2/attachment.html>