From james.d.gifford at gmail.com Mon Oct 3 10:59:28 2016 From: james.d.gifford at gmail.com (James Gifford) Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2016 10:59:28 -0700 Subject: [ilds] Mediterranean hinterlands In-Reply-To: References: <594BC808-B2BF-4228-8F4A-3715091B716C@gmail.com> Message-ID: <96e3455a-ca92-87e5-b90f-b3e4f01e1753@gmail.com> Hi Len, The series has generated a good deal of attention in the UK. It has it's own website, but the Durrell Wildlife Conservation Trust is quite good too: https://www.durrell.org/wildlife/the-durrells/ It's a good deal more creative with the source materials than the previous television series done by the BBC in 1987 & 2005, but it's also quite charming and has been very popular in the UK. Michael Haag has a book to accompany the series and has discussed the series on his blog: http://michaelhaag.blogspot.ca/2016/05/the-durrells-in-corfu_4.html http://michaelhaag.blogspot.ca/2016/05/after-i-watched-durrells-and-smiled_14.html http://michaelhaag.blogspot.ca/2016/09/the-durrells-for-spring-2017.html http://michaelhaag.blogspot.ca/2016/08/the-durrells-of-corfu-cover.html Cheers, James On 2016-10-01 6:10 AM, Len Worman wrote: > Sorry to butt in. However, of interest to all:. Last Sunday the PBS TV > station in Miami, Channel 2, ran an ad announcing a series called "The > Durrells in Corfu" to air later this year. Anyone know anything about > this? Len Worman > > On Sat, Oct 1, 2016 at 5:47 AM, James Gifford > wrote: > > Dear all, > > Greetings from Toulouse where Isabelle Keller-Privat has jus > organized a very successful conference on the Mediterranean hinterlands: > > http://www.univ-tlse2.fr/accueil/agenda/the-mediterranean-and-its-hinterlands-le-pays-en-profondeur--377012.kjsp > > > There were plenty of excellent papers on Durrell to be watched for > in /Caliban/ in the future. I'll announce to the list when that happens. > > Also, for anyone in Europe, the /Art et Libert?/ exhibition of > Egyptian Surrealism starts in Paris in October and runs in Dresden, > Madrid, & Liverpool until March 2018. It has some great material on > Durrell's milieu in 1940s Egypt (very highly recommended): > > http://www.artreoriented.com/ > > Last and least, I have a squib with a bit on Durrell through the > British Association of Modernist Studies. This one's just for fun: > > http://themodernistreview.co.uk/a-frightful-hobgoblin-stalks-through-modernism/ > > > All best, > James > > Sent from my iPad > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > From pinedurrellcorfu at gmail.com Mon Oct 3 11:39:54 2016 From: pinedurrellcorfu at gmail.com (Richard Pine) Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2016 21:39:54 +0300 Subject: [ilds] Mediterranean hinterlands In-Reply-To: <96e3455a-ca92-87e5-b90f-b3e4f01e1753@gmail.com> References: <594BC808-B2BF-4228-8F4A-3715091B716C@gmail.com> <96e3455a-ca92-87e5-b90f-b3e4f01e1753@gmail.com> Message-ID: I note that Professor Gifford suppressed the information to Len that was sent from the Durrell Library of Corfu. Why he should continue to censor information from this source, which is both professionally and strategically wrong, is a matter between himself and his colleagues on the ILDS committee who give him charge of the listserv. And if he were to mind his apostrophes the English grammar would be better listserved, too. RP On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 8:59 PM, James Gifford wrote: > Hi Len, > > The series has generated a good deal of attention in the UK. It has it's > own website, but the Durrell Wildlife Conservation Trust is quite good too: > > https://www.durrell.org/wildlife/the-durrells/ > > It's a good deal more creative with the source materials than the previous > television series done by the BBC in 1987 & 2005, but it's also quite > charming and has been very popular in the UK. > > Michael Haag has a book to accompany the series and has discussed the > series on his blog: > > http://michaelhaag.blogspot.ca/2016/05/the-durrells-in-corfu_4.html > > http://michaelhaag.blogspot.ca/2016/05/after-i-watched-durre > lls-and-smiled_14.html > > http://michaelhaag.blogspot.ca/2016/09/the-durrells-for-spring-2017.html > > http://michaelhaag.blogspot.ca/2016/08/the-durrells-of-corfu-cover.html > > Cheers, > James > > > On 2016-10-01 6:10 AM, Len Worman wrote: > >> Sorry to butt in. However, of interest to all:. Last Sunday the PBS TV >> station in Miami, Channel 2, ran an ad announcing a series called "The >> Durrells in Corfu" to air later this year. Anyone know anything about >> this? Len Worman >> >> On Sat, Oct 1, 2016 at 5:47 AM, James Gifford > > wrote: >> >> Dear all, >> >> Greetings from Toulouse where Isabelle Keller-Privat has jus >> organized a very successful conference on the Mediterranean >> hinterlands: >> >> http://www.univ-tlse2.fr/accueil/agenda/the-mediterranean- >> and-its-hinterlands-le-pays-en-profondeur--377012.kjsp >> > and-its-hinterlands-le-pays-en-profondeur--377012.kjsp> >> >> There were plenty of excellent papers on Durrell to be watched for >> in /Caliban/ in the future. I'll announce to the list when that >> happens. >> >> Also, for anyone in Europe, the /Art et Libert?/ exhibition of >> Egyptian Surrealism starts in Paris in October and runs in Dresden, >> Madrid, & Liverpool until March 2018. It has some great material on >> Durrell's milieu in 1940s Egypt (very highly recommended): >> >> http://www.artreoriented.com/ >> >> Last and least, I have a squib with a bit on Durrell through the >> British Association of Modernist Studies. This one's just for fun: >> >> http://themodernistreview.co.uk/a-frightful-hobgoblin-stalks >> -through-modernism/ >> > s-through-modernism/> >> >> All best, >> James >> >> Sent from my iPad >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gammage.kennedy at gmail.com Mon Oct 3 11:44:44 2016 From: gammage.kennedy at gmail.com (Kennedy Gammage) Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2016 11:44:44 -0700 Subject: [ilds] Evaluating the Quintet In-Reply-To: References: <3C504832-6F3B-421E-B8EC-F9692D6424A1@earthlink.net> <667FBB26-ADBF-4A1A-B0DB-760CA7923FDC@earthlink.net> <8D37B61E-3614-49CB-A65D-25ED42A0E986@earthlink.net> <76559F49-CF11-4951-8814-7EBE4F61F8F9@gmail.com> <63885EC6-B9C3-4BBA-BAA3-30F545F042F7@earthlink.net> Message-ID: Putting this supposition out there for discussion: that Jolan Chang was the inspiration for Sebastian / Affad in the Quintet ? infamously for all the annoying tantric sex with-and-in Constance, which I consider somewhat of a drawback for the central book in the Quintet and a Booker Prize shortlist. Please feel free to disagree - Ken On Sat, Oct 1, 2016 at 7:13 AM, Rick Schoff wrote: > > Thanks Bruce! That's helpful to me. I was accustomed to distortions of > time, after Bergson and Einstein, etc., but only through Durrell's fiction > came up so clearly against the idea of the non-stable ego. I knew he was > criticized for his characterizations being thin, really only providing him > the opportunity to declaim about things psychologic and philosophic. The > interleafing of the supposedly real narrative with the fictional within the > fiction (within the fiction? The Envoi never made me feel I had things > clear in my own mind) created a new dimension wherein different Durrell's > announced themselves as such. At least, that's how I've explained it to > myself! We circle back to my original point: the delight in the language > enabled me to continue all the way down the garden path he created without > misgivings. > > On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 11:35 AM, Bruce Redwine < > bredwine1968 at earthlink.net> wrote: > >> Rick, >> >> Good question. I was primarily thinking of the ending to *Monsieur,* >> the ?Envoi? and all the ?begetting,? which looks like a linguistic or >> kinship tree. ?D.? is the head or beginning of a breakdown of narration >> which proceeds to shatter the very idea of characterization as any kind of >> stable technique. And who is ?D?? Well, Durrell himself presumably?but >> the initial could also refer to ?Dog? as an inversion of ?God.? And so we >> have D./Durrell as some kind of Gnostic Demiurge?the ?Monsieur? or ?Prince >> of Darkenss" of the book?s title. (Recall ?Count D.? in *Prospero?s >> Cell*.) Inversion is a key concept in Durrell?s world. The *Quintet* >> is rife with inversions of identity (hence the obsession with mirrors) and >> sexuality (hence the obsession with incest and homosexuality). Durrell?s >> problem with identity goes back to his use of Freud?s ideas of the unstable >> ego, which becomes the author?s ?multiple selves.? All of which he >> explores through narration. >> >> Indian metaphysics, Buddhism, and Taoism also fit nicely into this >> personal philosophy?the idea of the ?no self.? >> >> Postmodernism obsesses with the trope of narration (what it means, how >> it?s done, its unsubstantiality), which ultimately becomes a questioning of >> the basis of reality or the reality of reality or the unreality of reality >> and so on and so on. So mirrors and their infinite reflections?as Orson >> Wells shows in his *Citizen Kane *(1941), when Kane walks in a hall of >> mirrors, a film which Durrell surely knew. >> >> A few important players in Postmodernism are Jorge Luis Borges, John >> Hawkes, and John Barth, the latter?s ?Lost in the Funhouse? being a study >> in narration and fictional conventions. I would also add Isak Dinesen and >> her *Seven Gothic Tales*. Durrell knew or met Borges, Hawkes, and >> Dinesen. He admired Dinesen in particular. They all had a lot in common. >> >> Bruce >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Sep 29, 2016, at 5:08 AM, Frederick Schoff >> wrote: >> >> >> Bruce - Can you elaborate on your idea that the Quintet 'shatters under >> the weight of postmodernism'? I'm embarking on another read of it and would >> like to understand your view better. Thanks! >> >> - Rick >> >> On Sep 28, 2016, at 7:16 PM, Bruce Redwine >> wrote: >> >> Yes, the opening to *Monsieur* is strong, along with the first 100 pages >> or so, but that slow train to Provence, like ?some super-glow-worm,? seem >> prophetic about what eventually happens to the novel?s narration. That is, >> from the very start, it seems infested with its own disease, the worm of >> death, if you will. At the end, the story breaks down, shatters under the >> weight of Postmodernism. Durrell was a gifted storyteller. But he rejects >> that gift?it?s almost an act of self-loathing. >> >> Bruce >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Sep 28, 2016, at 12:05 PM, Kennedy Gammage >> wrote: >> >> Agreeing with Bruce, my opinion is that the Avignon Quintet is overall >> very strong, starting with the first 170 pages of _Monsieur or The Prince >> of Darkness_ (1974). >> >> Here?s a parallel I just thought of: the writer characters Blanford and >> Sutcliffe, representing two sides of Durrell?s writerly persona (the pedant >> and the drunk) are both wounded in their sex - by shrapnel and due to an >> inverted marriage. >> >> The beginning of Livia is a bit of a chore: the dialogue between the >> writers, but around page 26 the flashback begins and it becomes quite >> wonderful: ?It was to be their last term at Oxford and Hilary had invited >> them both to journey with him to Provence for the long vac.? >> >> Each of the books has its iconic and memorable passages. There are a few >> flaws of course. >> >> Thanks - Ken >> >> >> On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 8:50 AM, Bruce Redwine < >> bredwine1968 at earthlink.net> wrote: >> >>> Richard, your explanation in *Mindscape* is a very informative >>> discussion of the significance of the quincunx in the *Quintet.* I >>> also see a connection to Durrell?s Heraldic Universe and its advocacy of >>> symbols and metaphors as the ultimate reality. But I don?t know how >>> successful this level of abstraction is in a work of fiction. >>> >>> Bruce >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sep 28, 2016, at 1:19 AM, Richard Pine >>> wrote: >>> >>> Bruce is entitled to say that we should question whether authors are the >>> best judges of their work. And Ravi is not quite accurate in saying that LD >>> considered the Quintet his 'best' book. His statement to me was quite >>> clear: The Quartet was his most successful, Tunc/Nunquam his most important >>> and the Quintet his most ambitious, But who was he to judge? I took him >>> seriously at the time, because of the emphasis he placed on Tunc/Nunquam. I >>> think LD knew that, for a variety and concatenation of reasons, the Quintet >>> hadn't worked - it had been too ambitious. But we can, I think, see the >>> 'plot' of the Quintet as both a narrative and a philosophical plot, >>> marrying east and west, and it is this difficulty for the author which also >>> creates problems for most 'western' minds. >>> I'll quote from my 'Mindscape' (which you can read on the DLC website): >>> >>> ?It will be my star-ypointed pyramid? Durrell wrote twice in the quarry >>> books for the *Quintet.* The triple significance of the expression >>> (which founds its explicit way into the text of the *Quintet* 1300) is >>> remarkable: not only does it suggest a metaphysical conceit, since it >>> echoes the ?star y-pointing pyramid? which Milton ordained for >>> Shakespeare?s bones, but also reminds us of the initial memory on which >>> *Monsieur* is predicated (?I was reliving the plot and counterplot of >>> Shakespeare?s Sonnets in my own life. I had found the master-mistress of my >>> passion? - *Quintet* 10); it also replicates the pyramidal force-field >>> of the quincunx as exemplified in architecture from both east and west, >>> including the Taj Mahal and the temple of Bakheng, of which Durrell had >>> made particular note. >>> >>> These geometric notions gave Durrell the mechanistic encouragement he >>> required to ?build? a structure of five novels which would then form a >>> force-field in a truly scientific sense. Thus the quincunxial idea both >>> provided the basis for what he was trying to achieve in the east-west >>> *entente* and the vehicle for one of the oldest of grail themes, that >>> of a square of four trees with a fifth planted at its centre, beneath which >>> the treasure lay. >>> >>> But the most significant fact is that Durrell believed that the ?power >>> of five?, when linked to his previously elucidated ?rule of four?, would >>> provide him with the means to negotiate the hitherto inaccessible, those >>> ?buried alive?. This would be the true meaning of *anagnorisis*, the >>> moment of recognition between sisters; between lovers; between writers; >>> between master and servant, creator and created; between the boy who left >>> home and the man who returns. It would represent the point at which the man >>> who, all his life, had told himself ?*he must not remember*?, could >>> regard himself in the mirror and, by submitting to memory, name himself. As >>> Kundera observed, ?the struggle of man against power is the struggle of >>> memory against forgetting?. >>> >>> PS: I will be posting Bruce's, Rick';s and Ravi's messages on the >>> COMMENTS page of the DLC website, and others which relate to our >>> understanding and appreciation of LD's overall achievements as a writer >>> with the ultimate ambition of the 'Tibetan novel'. >>> >>> RP >>> ------------------------------ >>> >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 12:52 AM, Bruce Redwine < >>> bredwine1968 at earthlink.net> wrote: >>> >>>> Ravi, whom I respect, reports that Durrell apparently thought the >>>> *Quintet* his best work. I doubt the truth of his statement, but my >>>> opinion is just that, an opinion. I don?t, however, think that authors are >>>> necessarily the best judge of their own art. Hemingway thought that *Across >>>> the River and into the Trees* (1950) was his best novel. He even >>>> compared it to some kind of literary ?calculus,? whereas his previous >>>> novels, presumably, were simply works of arithmetic. Who believes that >>>> nowadays? Few if any, I think. Durrell had his own philosophy (some mix >>>> of Indian and Chinese thought), but his real genius as a writer of fiction >>>> was a blend of storytelling and poetry. I don?t see this in the >>>> *Quintet* and think that Durrell went off the deep-end and got lost in >>>> the netherworld of his own dark obsessions (the philosophy not >>>> withstanding, which is of great interest, but which doesn?t save the whole >>>> enterprise from its own self-destruction). >>>> >>>> Bruce >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sep 27, 2016, at 9:12 AM, Ravi Nambiar wrote: >>>> >>>> Dear Bruce >>>> Your statement, "I think the success of the Quartet depends on >>>> literature, whereas the lack of success of the Quintet depends on >>>> philosophy", prompted me to collect some of Durrell's own words from the >>>> interviews he gave: >>>> "...this quintet is more important to me than the Alexandria Quartet". >>>> "Avignon Quintet will be my last book, a present to France." >>>> "The English don't very much like ideas and abstraction." >>>> "The book is really written for learned people." >>>> "The Avignon Quintet is an intellectual autobiography." >>>> "Quartet, the hurly-burly and ripening of experience, quintet the >>>> acceptance of reality." >>>> "The Alexandria Quartet takes into account Western psychology, dualism, >>>> and ambivalence." >>>> "The Quintet accordingly offers a solution: the East as a way out for >>>> the West. Things are so simple, nor so abstract." >>>> >>>> It is agreed by almost all D scholars that to understand Durrell, one >>>> has to read all of his work. The Quartet, the four, slides into the five, >>>> the Quintet ("five baskets of experience"): unlike in the quartet, "...in >>>> the quintet the last page is really the last page." >>>> Regards >>>> Ravi >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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: From durrelllibrarycorfu at gmail.com Mon Oct 3 11:47:49 2016 From: durrelllibrarycorfu at gmail.com (Richard Pine) Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2016 21:47:49 +0300 Subject: [ilds] "Durrells" current televsion series Message-ID: Professor James Gifford writes to Len Worman "The series has generated a good deal of attention in the UK. It has it's own website, but the Durrell Wildlife Conservation Trust is quite good too: https://www.durrell.org/wildlife/the-durrells/ It's a good deal more creative with the source materials than the previous television series done by the BBC in 1987 & 2005, but it's also quite charming and has been very popular in the UK. Michael Haag has a book to accompany the series and has discussed the series on his blog:" I note that Professor Gifford suppressed the information to Len that was sent from the Durrell Library of Corfu, which gave the same information, and more. Why he should continue to censor information from this source, which is both professionally and strategically unethical, is a matter between himself and his colleagues on the ILDS committee who give him charge of the listserv. The DLC website is accessed on a daily basis by far more readers than are members of the ILDS listserv, and reaches at least 1500 people in every part of the world. And if he were to mind his apostrophes the English grammar would be better listserved, too. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dtart at bigpond.net.au Mon Oct 3 13:36:53 2016 From: dtart at bigpond.net.au (Denise Tart & David Green) Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2016 07:36:53 +1100 Subject: [ilds] The Durrells tv series In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7E501308-2226-4526-88F8-7C01F0F5B314@bigpond.net.au> Yes, season one of the Durrells screened recently here in Australia. Surprisingly, it was picked up by the 7 network, a commercial channel, rather than the ABC. Denise and I enjoyed it. It plays with some of the 'facts' but is well acted and scripted. Mrs Durrell is the star and gun toting Leslie has a prominent role. Larry is more subdued than in some portrayals, most notably by Mathew Goode in 2005. Watch out for the vulgar but amusing captain Creech. This series is best enjoyed with a chilled bottle of Richmond Grove Chardonnay and a plate of Kalamata olives. Looking forward to season two. David Whitewine. Sent from my iPad > On 3 Oct 2016, at 2:12 AM, Richard Pine wrote: > > The 6-part series "The Durrells" screened in Britain this year, also in Australia. A second series is being shot right now in Corfu.For information on the series and the spin-off book by Michael Haag, visit the NEWS page of the Durrell Library of Corfu website > > > > www.durrelllibrarycorfu.org. > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From james.d.gifford at gmail.com Mon Oct 3 14:12:03 2016 From: james.d.gifford at gmail.com (James Gifford) Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2016 14:12:03 -0700 Subject: [ilds] Evaluating the Quintet In-Reply-To: References: <3C504832-6F3B-421E-B8EC-F9692D6424A1@earthlink.net> <667FBB26-ADBF-4A1A-B0DB-760CA7923FDC@earthlink.net> <8D37B61E-3614-49CB-A65D-25ED42A0E986@earthlink.net> <76559F49-CF11-4951-8814-7EBE4F61F8F9@gmail.com> <63885EC6-B9C3-4BBA-BAA3-30F545F042F7@earthlink.net> Message-ID: Hi Ken & Rick, Quick jet lagged thoughts... Michael Haag has done a lovely blog about a first time reader of the Quintet who wrote about the experience in postcards: http://michaelhaag.blogspot.ca/2016/09/postcards-from-lawrence-durrells-avignon.html Unlike most people, I came to read Durrell first through the Quintet and then moved backwards, reading the Quartet last among his major works. I think that makes my approach to Durrell a bit different from those who read him chronologically -- I actually like the Quintet very much, particularly the verbal play and ongoing uncertainty, and this has always influence how I've read the Quartet (and all other works). I also like Quinx and see a method in its textual recuperations from the notebooks that make up the previous volumes. I suspect it's not as easy to enjoy Quinx if one has read everything else by Durrell first... Perhaps like Rick, I tend to see "word beings" for Durrell's characters, which is quite unlike a romantic attachment to either Justine or Darley (or the wish to become like or to somehow inhabit such characters). The play with languages stands out most to my eye, like the train that comes back, the phrases that recur, and the way one draft bleeds into or transforms into a new text. In a sense, we're twigged to this from the outset by Slyie's black hair like "carbon paper" or characters who have "novel" feelings. Ceci n'est pas une pipe. The treachery of fiction, perhaps. Paul Lorenz and Ravi Nambiar are particularly attached to the "Eastern" themes in the Quintet, as are many others, though I must admit I tend toward Ken's view while still respecting their hard work. Just like the Gnosticism is a mash-up of Serge Hutin with news clippings about Slovenia in Durrell's notebooks (back to "word beings" or "verbal play" to my mind, not a serious worldview), I lean toward seeing the sexology, Hinduism, Yoga, and Buddhism more as play. That doesn't mean play isn't serious or important, but rather that its limitations are those of play (as are its opportunities). Cheers, James On 2016-10-03 11:44 AM, Kennedy Gammage wrote: > Putting this supposition out there for discussion: that Jolan Chang was > the inspiration for Sebastian / Affad in the Quintet ? infamously for > all the annoying tantric sex with-and-in Constance, which I consider > somewhat of a drawback for the central book in the Quintet and a Booker > Prize shortlist. > > Please feel free to disagree - Ken From pinedurrellcorfu at gmail.com Mon Oct 3 14:12:58 2016 From: pinedurrellcorfu at gmail.com (Richard Pine) Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2016 00:12:58 +0300 Subject: [ilds] The Durrells tv series In-Reply-To: <7E501308-2226-4526-88F8-7C01F0F5B314@bigpond.net.au> References: <7E501308-2226-4526-88F8-7C01F0F5B314@bigpond.net.au> Message-ID: I thought Simon Nye (who also scripted the 2005 adaptation) did marvels - especially 1) rehabilitating Nancy Durrell - whom Gerry airbrushed out of MFOA 2) really drawing out the character of Leslie, who is so often portrayed as merely a gun-crazy buffoon, but who in this version is shown to be the very bewildered and sensitive adolescent that he was in 'real' life 3) and altho I agree that Keeley Hawes was superb as Mrs D (equalling, perhaps, Hannah Gordon in the 1st version and outplaying Imelda Staunton in the 2nd) I believe the star of the show was Milo Parker as Gerry - he had already distinguished himself as the boy playing opposite Ian McKellen in "Mr Holmes". The production company sold the series to British ITV (i.e. commercial) which probably explains why it was screened on a commercial channel in Australia But none of this explains why Lawrentians continue to look down their snobby noses at Gerald Durrell's writing. And David, try it with a bottle of Santorini Assyrtiko and CORFIOT olives! RP On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 11:36 PM, Denise Tart & David Green < dtart at bigpond.net.au> wrote: > Yes, season one of the Durrells screened recently here in Australia. > Surprisingly, it was picked up by the 7 network, a commercial channel, > rather than the ABC. Denise and I enjoyed it. It plays with some of the > 'facts' but is well acted and scripted. Mrs Durrell is the star and gun > toting Leslie has a prominent role. Larry is more subdued than in some > portrayals, most notably by Mathew Goode in 2005. Watch out for the vulgar > but amusing captain Creech. This series is best enjoyed with a chilled > bottle of Richmond Grove Chardonnay and a plate of Kalamata olives. Looking > forward to season two. > > David Whitewine. > > Sent from my iPad > > On 3 Oct 2016, at 2:12 AM, Richard Pine > wrote: > > The 6-part series "The Durrells" screened in Britain this year, also in > Australia. A second series is being shot right now in Corfu.For information > on the series and the spin-off book by Michael Haag, visit the NEWS page of > the Durrell Library of Corfu website > > > *www.durrelllibrarycorfu.org .* > > _______________________________________________ > 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: From james.d.gifford at gmail.com Mon Oct 3 16:05:35 2016 From: james.d.gifford at gmail.com (James Gifford) Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2016 16:05:35 -0700 Subject: [ilds] ILDS Digest, Vol 114, Issue 1 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 2016-10-01 6:58 PM, Sumantra Nag wrote: > 2. It so happens that I am now trying to read - among > other books and amidst professional tasks - Peter > Nicholls' Modernisms, A Literary Guide (Second Edition), > Palgrave Macmillan, 1995, 2009. It's an excellent book, and though I've looked at both editions (the U Calif. P and Palgrave 2nd edition), I've not actually attended closely to what changed between them. It's the first edition that I read through closely. Astradur Eysteinsson's /The Concept of Modernism/ is also a good follow-up (precursor) before the "New Modernist Studies" that developed out of all that mid-90s activity. Neither discusses Durrell, but I'd say both help to inform any reading of him. Enjoy! -James From dtart at bigpond.net.au Mon Oct 3 19:09:03 2016 From: dtart at bigpond.net.au (Denise Tart & David Green) Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2016 13:09:03 +1100 Subject: [ilds] The Durrells tv series In-Reply-To: References: <7E501308-2226-4526-88F8-7C01F0F5B314@bigpond.net.au> Message-ID: Richard, I agree with all your points. Indeed I found it refreshing that Margot and Leslie featured strongly as well Louisa's desire for sex/love. Milo is almost a dead ringer for Gerry as a ten year old and that big hat; well I have one just like it at my holiday house. I may not be typical, but I came to Lawrence Durrell through his brother, so to speak. First MFAOA and the Donkey Rustlers, Garden of Gods, Catch me a Colobus etc. as I child and teenager I collected insects, sea life, kept turtles and evan had a dingy sometimes known as the Bootlebumtrinket. But Gerry's portrayal of Larry drew me in and that's how the lawrentian fascination began. I visited Corfu in 1985 on a Durrell pilgrimage and a return visit is long overdue. Sadly, Greek wines in general and Corfiot olives are not that easy to come by here. Unlike many, I enjoy retsina very much. Here's to all the Durrells, certainly a family who changed my life. David Whitewine Sent from my iPad > On 4 Oct 2016, at 8:12 AM, Richard Pine wrote: > > I thought Simon Nye (who also scripted the 2005 adaptation) did marvels - especially > 1) rehabilitating Nancy Durrell - whom Gerry airbrushed out of MFOA > 2) really drawing out the character of Leslie, who is so often portrayed as merely a gun-crazy buffoon, but who in this version is shown to be the very bewildered and sensitive adolescent that he was in 'real' life > 3) and altho I agree that Keeley Hawes was superb as Mrs D (equalling, perhaps, Hannah Gordon in the 1st version and outplaying Imelda Staunton in the 2nd) I believe the star of the show was Milo Parker as Gerry - he had already distinguished himself as the boy playing opposite Ian McKellen in "Mr Holmes". > The production company sold the series to British ITV (i.e. commercial) which probably explains why it was screened on a commercial channel in Australia > But none of this explains why Lawrentians continue to look down their snobby noses at Gerald Durrell's writing. > And David, try it with a bottle of Santorini Assyrtiko and CORFIOT olives! > RP > >> On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 11:36 PM, Denise Tart & David Green wrote: >> Yes, season one of the Durrells screened recently here in Australia. Surprisingly, it was picked up by the 7 network, a commercial channel, rather than the ABC. Denise and I enjoyed it. It plays with some of the 'facts' but is well acted and scripted. Mrs Durrell is the star and gun toting Leslie has a prominent role. Larry is more subdued than in some portrayals, most notably by Mathew Goode in 2005. Watch out for the vulgar but amusing captain Creech. This series is best enjoyed with a chilled bottle of Richmond Grove Chardonnay and a plate of Kalamata olives. Looking forward to season two. >> >> David Whitewine. >> >> Sent from my iPad >> >>> On 3 Oct 2016, at 2:12 AM, Richard Pine wrote: >>> >>> The 6-part series "The Durrells" screened in Britain this year, also in Australia. A second series is being shot right now in Corfu.For information on the series and the spin-off book by Michael Haag, visit the NEWS page of the Durrell Library of Corfu website >>> >>> >>> >>> www.durrelllibrarycorfu.org. >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 >> > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cnncravi at gmail.com Mon Oct 3 22:23:12 2016 From: cnncravi at gmail.com (Ravi Nambiar) Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2016 10:53:12 +0530 Subject: [ilds] ILDS Digest, Vol 114, Issue 3 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: "The effective in art is what rapes the emotions of the viewer without nourishing their values", Durrell: the difference between the Quartet and the Quintet (trying to nourish "their values"). Ravi On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 12:30 AM, wrote: > 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: Mediterranean hinterlands (James Gifford) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2016 10:59:28 -0700 > From: James Gifford > To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca > Subject: Re: [ilds] Mediterranean hinterlands > Message-ID: <96e3455a-ca92-87e5-b90f-b3e4f01e1753 at gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed > > Hi Len, > > The series has generated a good deal of attention in the UK. It has > it's own website, but the Durrell Wildlife Conservation Trust is quite > good too: > > https://www.durrell.org/wildlife/the-durrells/ > > It's a good deal more creative with the source materials than the > previous television series done by the BBC in 1987 & 2005, but it's also > quite charming and has been very popular in the UK. > > Michael Haag has a book to accompany the series and has discussed the > series on his blog: > > http://michaelhaag.blogspot.ca/2016/05/the-durrells-in-corfu_4.html > > http://michaelhaag.blogspot.ca/2016/05/after-i-watched- > durrells-and-smiled_14.html > > http://michaelhaag.blogspot.ca/2016/09/the-durrells-for-spring-2017.html > > http://michaelhaag.blogspot.ca/2016/08/the-durrells-of-corfu-cover.html > > Cheers, > James > > > On 2016-10-01 6:10 AM, Len Worman wrote: > > Sorry to butt in. However, of interest to all:. Last Sunday the PBS TV > > station in Miami, Channel 2, ran an ad announcing a series called "The > > Durrells in Corfu" to air later this year. Anyone know anything about > > this? Len Worman > > > > On Sat, Oct 1, 2016 at 5:47 AM, James Gifford > > wrote: > > > > Dear all, > > > > Greetings from Toulouse where Isabelle Keller-Privat has jus > > organized a very successful conference on the Mediterranean > hinterlands: > > > > http://www.univ-tlse2.fr/accueil/agenda/the-mediterranean-and-its- > hinterlands-le-pays-en-profondeur--377012.kjsp > > hinterlands-le-pays-en-profondeur--377012.kjsp> > > > > There were plenty of excellent papers on Durrell to be watched for > > in /Caliban/ in the future. I'll announce to the list when that > happens. > > > > Also, for anyone in Europe, the /Art et Libert?/ exhibition of > > Egyptian Surrealism starts in Paris in October and runs in Dresden, > > Madrid, & Liverpool until March 2018. It has some great material on > > Durrell's milieu in 1940s Egypt (very highly recommended): > > > > http://www.artreoriented.com/ > > > > Last and least, I have a squib with a bit on Durrell through the > > British Association of Modernist Studies. This one's just for fun: > > > > http://themodernistreview.co.uk/a-frightful-hobgoblin- > stalks-through-modernism/ > > stalks-through-modernism/> > > > > All best, > > James > > > > Sent from my iPad > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Subject: Digest Footer > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > > ------------------------------ > > End of ILDS Digest, Vol 114, Issue 3 > ************************************ > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From james.d.gifford at gmail.com Tue Oct 4 09:27:01 2016 From: james.d.gifford at gmail.com (James Gifford) Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2016 09:27:01 -0700 Subject: [ilds] postmodernism & literary reputations Message-ID: Dear all, Related to our discussion of postmodernism and literary reputations, I just happened on this interesting fragment in Gilbert Sorrentino's letters to John O'Brien (27 September 1974): "It is permissible to be 'interested in' contemporary letters, so long as you are interested in the right kind. The 'line' runs from Henry Miller through Lawrence Durrell and thence to [John] Barth, [Donald] Barthelme, [Robert] Coover, [Thomas] Pynchon, down to our 'peers' ? [Ronald] Sukenick, [Richard] Brautigan, [Jerzy] Kozinski [sic], et al. You are still safe with O.K. black folks like Ish[mael] Reed and LeRoi [Jones], but outside those two, you're not too cool. What I'm saying, of course, is heresy, i.e., 'contemporary literature' is only certain people." I don't think this complaint would hold up today, but it's a fascinating context for the period and for O'Brien's discontents with then contemporary literary criticism that led to his founding of the Dalkey Archive Press. The lineage makes perfect sense, but the contention that these figures block out others from reaching academia and the mainstream literary media doesn't seem viable in today's context. Durrell and Miller are both outsiders to much of academic discourse now, as are those he lists as "peers" with the exception of Pynchon. The quotation is taken from Abram Foley's article: Foley, Abram. "Ghosts from Limbo Patrum: Dalkey Archive Press and Institutional Literary History." ASAP/Journal 1.3 (2016): 439-459. DOI: 10.1353/asa.2016.0040 All best, James From bredwine1968 at earthlink.net Tue Oct 4 10:54:08 2016 From: bredwine1968 at earthlink.net (Bruce Redwine) Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2016 10:54:08 -0700 Subject: [ilds] Jolan Chang In-Reply-To: References: <3C504832-6F3B-421E-B8EC-F9692D6424A1@earthlink.net> <667FBB26-ADBF-4A1A-B0DB-760CA7923FDC@earthlink.net> <8D37B61E-3614-49CB-A65D-25ED42A0E986@earthlink.net> <76559F49-CF11-4951-8814-7EBE4F61F8F9@gmail.com> <63885EC6-B9C3-4BBA-BAA3-30F545F042F7@earthlink.net> Message-ID: Ken, Interesting idea, Jolan Chang as ?inspiration? for Affad in Sebastian. Chang appears at beginning of A Smile in the Mind?s Eye (1980). Sebastian or Ruling Passions appears in 1983. I first thought Chang was another of Durrell?s inventions?he seemed too improbable. He was, however, a real person who wrote The Tao of Love and Sex: The Ancient Chinese Way to Ecstasy (1977). They actually met, as MacNiven verifies. The times are also right, so maybe there is a connection. I agree?Durrell gets too explicit with Constance and sex. I?d call his treatment highbrow pornography. Bruce . > On Oct 3, 2016, at 11:44 AM, Kennedy Gammage wrote: > > Putting this supposition out there for discussion: that Jolan Chang was the inspiration for Sebastian / Affad in the Quintet ? infamously for all the annoying tantric sex with-and-in Constance, which I consider somewhat of a drawback for the central book in the Quintet and a Booker Prize shortlist. > > Please feel free to disagree - Ken > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pinedurrellcorfu at gmail.com Tue Oct 4 11:13:45 2016 From: pinedurrellcorfu at gmail.com (Richard Pine) Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2016 21:13:45 +0300 Subject: [ilds] Jolan Chang In-Reply-To: References: <3C504832-6F3B-421E-B8EC-F9692D6424A1@earthlink.net> <667FBB26-ADBF-4A1A-B0DB-760CA7923FDC@earthlink.net> <8D37B61E-3614-49CB-A65D-25ED42A0E986@earthlink.net> <76559F49-CF11-4951-8814-7EBE4F61F8F9@gmail.com> <63885EC6-B9C3-4BBA-BAA3-30F545F042F7@earthlink.net> Message-ID: There is footage of Jolan Chang talking about LD, and voice of LD talking about Chang, in the BBC documentary on LD, "Lawrence Durrell: A Smile in The Mind's Eye" narrated and co-produced by Margaret McCall, screened 15 August 1998. RP On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 8:54 PM, Bruce Redwine wrote: > Ken, > > Interesting idea, Jolan Chang as ?inspiration? for Affad in *Sebastian.* > Chang appears at beginning of *A Smile in the Mind?s Eye* (1980). *Sebastian > or Ruling Passions* appears in 1983. I first thought Chang was another > of Durrell?s inventions?he seemed too improbable. He was, however, a real > person who wrote *The Tao of Love and Sex: The Ancient Chinese Way to > Ecstasy* (1977). They actually met, as MacNiven verifies. The times are > also right, so maybe there is a connection. I agree?Durrell gets too > explicit with Constance and sex. I?d call his treatment highbrow > pornography. > > Bruce > > > > > . > > On Oct 3, 2016, at 11:44 AM, Kennedy Gammage > wrote: > > Putting this supposition out there for discussion: that Jolan Chang was > the inspiration for Sebastian / Affad in the Quintet ? infamously for all > the annoying tantric sex with-and-in Constance, which I consider somewhat > of a drawback for the central book in the Quintet and a Booker Prize > shortlist. > > Please feel free to disagree - Ken > > > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bredwine1968 at earthlink.net Tue Oct 4 14:19:08 2016 From: bredwine1968 at earthlink.net (Bruce Redwine) Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2016 14:19:08 -0700 Subject: [ilds] Evaluating the Quintet In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Ravi, I like the contrast between Durrell?s Constance and Tennyson?s ?Ulysses?: to yield v. not to yield. I think you?re absolutely right in this. That?s the Indian metaphysics of Durrell?s philosophy, which is very un-Western. As to the rest of the Quintet, it has so many aspects (and defects) that readers will be puzzling over these for years to come. I don?t think, however, that Durrell himself was ever ?happy.? In this regard, he was Odyssean, ?to strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.? What he advocated was not necessarily what he practiced. Bruce > On Sep 28, 2016, at 8:14 PM, Ravi Nambiar wrote: > > Bruce > Thanks for your expert comments. You are hundred percent right. The Quintet may/will get the fate of The Revolt. I don't speak authoritatively at all. I am a humble admirer of Durrell. I just quoted Durrell's own words (so that I can escape) only to show that he had not anticipated a Quartet-type audience for his Quintet ("The book is really written for learned people."); and, in spite of that, he claimed this novel his best. My only contention is that it is too early to write off this novel as a failure. Also, there are some fine parts which our young scholars could/should pursue. Our negative (final) judgement should not, I feel, discourage anyone from going into its by-lanes. For example, I liked the contrast Durrell made to the concept of Victorian heroism with a/the modern heroism: replacing the slogan, "to strive, to seek, to find and not to yield" with the slogan, "to surrender, to yield, to abdicate and receive" (Constance 269). I don't think substituting the heroism of Ulysses with that of a Yogi is any kind of philosophy or a bad philosophy. Yoga is popular now. Durrell's concern was to make his character seek happiness, inner happiness, a kind of"bliss-side up" life (the first half of the novel was the war-ridden world). That is why I called his novel "Eudaemonistic" novel, the type of novel making its theme as a system of ethics that evaluates actions (heroism) in terms of their capacity to produce happiness. The Quintet may be a failure, but, it certainly gives some narrative clues to future writers. We have had enough of realism, surrealism, magic realism, and so on. Why not try metarealism also? > My apology to all those who disagree with me. Let us agree to disagree for the sake of literature. > Best > Ravi > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pinedurrellcorfu at gmail.com Tue Oct 4 14:29:38 2016 From: pinedurrellcorfu at gmail.com (Richard Pine) Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 00:29:38 +0300 Subject: [ilds] Evaluating the Quintet In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: To appreciate the east-west tension in LD - and particularly the Quintet - it's helpful to look at Kipling's *Kim* - which LD called his 'bedside book' - and to look also at the ways western critics have tried to engage with this tension - and then to look at the ways non-western critics like Said and Chaudhuri have read *Kim*. RP On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 12:19 AM, Bruce Redwine wrote: > Ravi, > > I like the contrast between Durrell?s *Constance* and Tennyson?s > ?Ulysses?: to yield v. not to yield. I think you?re absolutely right in > this. That?s the Indian metaphysics of Durrell?s philosophy, which is very > un-Western. As to the rest of the *Quintet,* it has so many aspects (and > defects) that readers will be puzzling over these for years to come. I > don?t think, however, that Durrell himself was ever ?happy.? In this > regard, he was Odyssean, ?to strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.? > What he advocated was not necessarily what he practiced. > > Bruce > > > > > On Sep 28, 2016, at 8:14 PM, Ravi Nambiar wrote: > > Bruce > Thanks for your expert comments. You are hundred percent right.* The > Quintet* may/will get the fate of *The Revolt*. I don't speak > authoritatively at all. I am a humble admirer of Durrell. I just quoted > Durrell's own words (so that I can escape) only to show that he had not > anticipated a Quartet-type audience for his Quintet ("The book is really > written for learned people."); and, in spite of that, he claimed this > novel his best. My only contention is that it is too early to write off > this novel as a failure. Also, there are some fine parts which our young > scholars could/should pursue. Our negative (final) judgement should not, I > feel, discourage anyone from going into its by-lanes. For example, I liked > the contrast Durrell made to the concept of Victorian heroism with a/the > modern heroism: replacing the slogan, "to strive, to seek, to find and not > to yield" with the slogan, "to surrender, to yield, to abdicate and > receive" (*Constance* 269). I don't think substituting the heroism of > Ulysses with that of a Yogi is any kind of philosophy or a bad philosophy. > Yoga is popular now. Durrell's concern was to make his character seek > happiness, inner happiness, a kind of"bliss-side up" life (the first half > of the novel was the war-ridden world). That is why I called his novel > "Eudaemonistic" novel, the type of novel making its theme as a system of > ethics that evaluates actions (heroism) in terms of their capacity to produce > happiness. The Quintet may be a failure, but, it certainly gives some > narrative clues to future writers. We have had enough of realism, > surrealism, magic realism, and so on. Why not try metarealism also? > My apology to all those who disagree with me. Let us agree to disagree for > the sake of literature. > Best > Ravi > > > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dtart at bigpond.net.au Tue Oct 4 15:12:57 2016 From: dtart at bigpond.net.au (Denise Tart & David Green) Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 09:12:57 +1100 Subject: [ilds] Jolan Chang In-Reply-To: References: <3C504832-6F3B-421E-B8EC-F9692D6424A1@earthlink.net> <667FBB26-ADBF-4A1A-B0DB-760CA7923FDC@earthlink.net> <8D37B61E-3614-49CB-A65D-25ED42A0E986@earthlink.net> <76559F49-CF11-4951-8814-7EBE4F61F8F9@gmail.com> <63885EC6-B9C3-4BBA-BAA3-30F545F042F7@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <6FAC2367-36A3-4AB9-9DF3-79EE650B40C4@bigpond.net.au> According to G Bowker the Chinese Taoist philosopher and sexologist, with Durrell had been corresponding, visited him in Sommieres at the beginning of 1976. At the time Larry was living alone in the gloomy old house in one or two rooms. Chang said Durrell ejaculated too much and drank too much and needed to stop drinking and only ejaculate occasionally. I wonder how much Larry paid him for this advice? Certainly he does not seem to have followed it. David. Sent from my iPad > On 5 Oct 2016, at 4:54 AM, Bruce Redwine wrote: > > Ken, > > Interesting idea, Jolan Chang as ?inspiration? for Affad in Sebastian. Chang appears at beginning of A Smile in the Mind?s Eye (1980). Sebastian or Ruling Passions appears in 1983. I first thought Chang was another of Durrell?s inventions?he seemed too improbable. He was, however, a real person who wrote The Tao of Love and Sex: The Ancient Chinese Way to Ecstasy (1977). They actually met, as MacNiven verifies. The times are also right, so maybe there is a connection. I agree?Durrell gets too explicit with Constance and sex. I?d call his treatment highbrow pornography. > > Bruce > > > > > . >> On Oct 3, 2016, at 11:44 AM, Kennedy Gammage wrote: >> >> Putting this supposition out there for discussion: that Jolan Chang was the inspiration for Sebastian / Affad in the Quintet ? infamously for all the annoying tantric sex with-and-in Constance, which I consider somewhat of a drawback for the central book in the Quintet and a Booker Prize shortlist. >> >> Please feel free to disagree - Ken > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bredwine1968 at earthlink.net Tue Oct 4 15:18:29 2016 From: bredwine1968 at earthlink.net (Bruce Redwine) Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2016 15:18:29 -0700 Subject: [ilds] Jolan Chang In-Reply-To: <6FAC2367-36A3-4AB9-9DF3-79EE650B40C4@bigpond.net.au> References: <3C504832-6F3B-421E-B8EC-F9692D6424A1@earthlink.net> <667FBB26-ADBF-4A1A-B0DB-760CA7923FDC@earthlink.net> <8D37B61E-3614-49CB-A65D-25ED42A0E986@earthlink.net> <76559F49-CF11-4951-8814-7EBE4F61F8F9@gmail.com> <63885EC6-B9C3-4BBA-BAA3-30F545F042F7@earthlink.net> <6FAC2367-36A3-4AB9-9DF3-79EE650B40C4@bigpond.net.au> Message-ID: <87574AD1-441F-400E-BE8E-E1E65118499A@earthlink.net> Good story! And probably good advice for all and sundry. But who follows it! Bruce > On Oct 4, 2016, at 3:12 PM, Denise Tart & David Green wrote: > > According to G Bowker the Chinese Taoist philosopher and sexologist, with Durrell had been corresponding, visited him in Sommieres at the beginning of 1976. At the time Larry was living alone in the gloomy old house in one or two rooms. Chang said Durrell ejaculated too much and drank too much and needed to stop drinking and only ejaculate occasionally. I wonder how much Larry paid him for this advice? Certainly he does not seem to have followed it. > > David. > > Sent from my iPad > > On 5 Oct 2016, at 4:54 AM, Bruce Redwine > wrote: > >> Ken, >> >> Interesting idea, Jolan Chang as ?inspiration? for Affad in Sebastian. Chang appears at beginning of A Smile in the Mind?s Eye (1980). Sebastian or Ruling Passions appears in 1983. I first thought Chang was another of Durrell?s inventions?he seemed too improbable. He was, however, a real person who wrote The Tao of Love and Sex: The Ancient Chinese Way to Ecstasy (1977). They actually met, as MacNiven verifies. The times are also right, so maybe there is a connection. I agree?Durrell gets too explicit with Constance and sex. I?d call his treatment highbrow pornography. >> >> Bruce >> >> >> >> >> . >>> On Oct 3, 2016, at 11:44 AM, Kennedy Gammage > wrote: >>> >>> Putting this supposition out there for discussion: that Jolan Chang was the inspiration for Sebastian / Affad in the Quintet ? infamously for all the annoying tantric sex with-and-in Constance, which I consider somewhat of a drawback for the central book in the Quintet and a Booker Prize shortlist. >>> >>> Please feel free to disagree - Ken >>> >> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bredwine1968 at earthlink.net Tue Oct 4 15:29:17 2016 From: bredwine1968 at earthlink.net (Bruce Redwine) Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2016 15:29:17 -0700 Subject: [ilds] Evaluating the Quintet In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <66DAA229-D4C8-4E01-A977-DA6E61EEFFA4@earthlink.net> Richard, you?ve mentioned Kipling?s Kim before in this context. I?ll have to reread it in the way you suggest. I must have missed something, but I can imagine what Said probably said. I wonder why Durrell didn?t keep Forster?s Passage to India as a ?bedside book.? It seems equally relevant. Forster, by the way, didn?t like Durrell and his brand of Romanticism and didn?t say nice things about him in private. Durrell, on the other hand, was very gracious towards E. M. Bruce > On Oct 4, 2016, at 2:29 PM, Richard Pine wrote: > > To appreciate the east-west tension in LD - and particularly the Quintet - it's helpful to look at Kipling's Kim - which LD called his 'bedside book' - and to look also at the ways western critics have tried to engage with this tension - and then to look at the ways non-western critics like Said and Chaudhuri have read Kim. > RP > > On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 12:19 AM, Bruce Redwine > wrote: > Ravi, > > I like the contrast between Durrell?s Constance and Tennyson?s ?Ulysses?: to yield v. not to yield. I think you?re absolutely right in this. That?s the Indian metaphysics of Durrell?s philosophy, which is very un-Western. As to the rest of the Quintet, it has so many aspects (and defects) that readers will be puzzling over these for years to come. I don?t think, however, that Durrell himself was ever ?happy.? In this regard, he was Odyssean, ?to strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.? What he advocated was not necessarily what he practiced. > > Bruce > > > > >> On Sep 28, 2016, at 8:14 PM, Ravi Nambiar > wrote: >> >> Bruce >> Thanks for your expert comments. You are hundred percent right. The Quintet may/will get the fate of The Revolt. I don't speak authoritatively at all. I am a humble admirer of Durrell. I just quoted Durrell's own words (so that I can escape) only to show that he had not anticipated a Quartet-type audience for his Quintet ("The book is really written for learned people."); and, in spite of that, he claimed this novel his best. My only contention is that it is too early to write off this novel as a failure. Also, there are some fine parts which our young scholars could/should pursue. Our negative (final) judgement should not, I feel, discourage anyone from going into its by-lanes. For example, I liked the contrast Durrell made to the concept of Victorian heroism with a/the modern heroism: replacing the slogan, "to strive, to seek, to find and not to yield" with the slogan, "to surrender, to yield, to abdicate and receive" (Constance 269). I don't think substituting the heroism of Ulysses with that of a Yogi is any kind of philosophy or a bad philosophy. Yoga is popular now. Durrell's concern was to make his character seek happiness, inner happiness, a kind of"bliss-side up" life (the first half of the novel was the war-ridden world). That is why I called his novel "Eudaemonistic" novel, the type of novel making its theme as a system of ethics that evaluates actions (heroism) in terms of their capacity to produce happiness. The Quintet may be a failure, but, it certainly gives some narrative clues to future writers. We have had enough of realism, surrealism, magic realism, and so on. Why not try metarealism also? >> My apology to all those who disagree with me. Let us agree to disagree for the sake of literature. >> Best >> Ravi >> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From durrelllibrarycorfu at gmail.com Tue Oct 4 22:56:45 2016 From: durrelllibrarycorfu at gmail.com (Richard Pine) Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 08:56:45 +0300 Subject: [ilds] Jolan Chang Message-ID: David writes: "According to G Bowker the Chinese Taoist philosopher and sexologist, with Durrell had been corresponding, visited him in Sommieres at the beginning of 1976. At the time Larry was living alone in the gloomy old house in one or two rooms. Chang said Durrell ejaculated too much and drank too much and needed to stop drinking and only ejaculate occasionally. I wonder how much Larry paid him for this advice? Certainly he does not seem to have followed it." Yes, this is explicitly discussed in the BBC documentary "LD A Smile in the Mind's Eye" (1998) which was mentioned in an earlier message. We hope to post this documentary, along with other video- and audio- items, on the DLC website very soon. RP -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pinedurrellcorfu at gmail.com Tue Oct 4 23:03:56 2016 From: pinedurrellcorfu at gmail.com (Richard Pine) Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 09:03:56 +0300 Subject: [ilds] Evaluating the Quintet In-Reply-To: <66DAA229-D4C8-4E01-A977-DA6E61EEFFA4@earthlink.net> References: <66DAA229-D4C8-4E01-A977-DA6E61EEFFA4@earthlink.net> Message-ID: I think what continued to resonate with LD about "Kim" was the fact that like Kipling LD had been born there and as we know deeply resented 'losing' his Indian childhood; that Kim was, as LD supposed himself to be, Anglo-Irish; and that he had known something of Kim's early years - Walsh in Pied Piper of Lovers has a lot in common with Kim. On the other hand, Forster was a 'travel writer' in India and however much he empathised with Indians, he didn't have that background. See what LD says about Kim, quoted in my book "Mindscape" (readable online on the DLC website - pp. 43-46 and 123-126 especially). RP On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 1:29 AM, Bruce Redwine wrote: > Richard, you?ve mentioned Kipling?s *Kim* before in this context. I?ll > have to reread it in the way you suggest. I must have missed something, > but I can imagine what Said probably said. I wonder why Durrell didn?t > keep Forster?s *Passage to India* as a ?bedside book.? It seems equally > relevant. Forster, by the way, didn?t like Durrell and his brand of > Romanticism and didn?t say nice things about him in private. Durrell, on > the other hand, was very gracious towards E. M. > > Bruce > > > > > > On Oct 4, 2016, at 2:29 PM, Richard Pine > wrote: > > To appreciate the east-west tension in LD - and particularly the Quintet - > it's helpful to look at Kipling's *Kim* - which LD called his 'bedside > book' - and to look also at the ways western critics have tried to engage > with this tension - and then to look at the ways non-western critics like > Said and Chaudhuri have read *Kim*. > RP > > On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 12:19 AM, Bruce Redwine > wrote: > >> Ravi, >> >> I like the contrast between Durrell?s *Constance* and Tennyson?s >> ?Ulysses?: to yield v. not to yield. I think you?re absolutely right in >> this. That?s the Indian metaphysics of Durrell?s philosophy, which is very >> un-Western. As to the rest of the *Quintet,* it has so many aspects >> (and defects) that readers will be puzzling over these for years to come. >> I don?t think, however, that Durrell himself was ever ?happy.? In this >> regard, he was Odyssean, ?to strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.? >> What he advocated was not necessarily what he practiced. >> >> Bruce >> >> >> >> >> On Sep 28, 2016, at 8:14 PM, Ravi Nambiar wrote: >> >> Bruce >> Thanks for your expert comments. You are hundred percent right.* The >> Quintet* may/will get the fate of *The Revolt*. I don't speak >> authoritatively at all. I am a humble admirer of Durrell. I just quoted >> Durrell's own words (so that I can escape) only to show that he had not >> anticipated a Quartet-type audience for his Quintet ("The book is really >> written for learned people."); and, in spite of that, he claimed this >> novel his best. My only contention is that it is too early to write off >> this novel as a failure. Also, there are some fine parts which our young >> scholars could/should pursue. Our negative (final) judgement should not, I >> feel, discourage anyone from going into its by-lanes. For example, I liked >> the contrast Durrell made to the concept of Victorian heroism with a/the >> modern heroism: replacing the slogan, "to strive, to seek, to find and not >> to yield" with the slogan, "to surrender, to yield, to abdicate and >> receive" (*Constance* 269). I don't think substituting the heroism of >> Ulysses with that of a Yogi is any kind of philosophy or a bad philosophy. >> Yoga is popular now. Durrell's concern was to make his character seek >> happiness, inner happiness, a kind of"bliss-side up" life (the first half >> of the novel was the war-ridden world). That is why I called his novel >> "Eudaemonistic" novel, the type of novel making its theme as a system of >> ethics that evaluates actions (heroism) in terms of their capacity to produce >> happiness. The Quintet may be a failure, but, it certainly gives some >> narrative clues to future writers. We have had enough of realism, >> surrealism, magic realism, and so on. Why not try metarealism also? >> My apology to all those who disagree with me. Let us agree to disagree >> for the sake of literature. >> Best >> Ravi >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From frederick.schoff at gmail.com Wed Oct 5 06:59:58 2016 From: frederick.schoff at gmail.com (Frederick Schoff) Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 09:59:58 -0400 Subject: [ilds] Evaluating the Quintet In-Reply-To: <66DAA229-D4C8-4E01-A977-DA6E61EEFFA4@earthlink.net> References: <66DAA229-D4C8-4E01-A977-DA6E61EEFFA4@earthlink.net> Message-ID: I'm reading "Kim" for the first time as an adult. It's not hard to see the east/west contrast. I imagine LD loved the boisterous and colorful aspects of it (is this part and parcel of the "romanticism" Forster didn't like?). Also, I think, the idea of a "Great Game" as the armature and animator of a story impressed Durrell. I first read the Quartet for its overall lushness and the interactions and thoughts of the characters. But "Palestine" ruled over all the action, gave shape and defined the parameters of the story. In the Quintet it's the Templars and their rumored treasure. In addition to other aspects, I think "Kim" taught Durrell some key lessons about pure story-telling. Sure, "Kim" might be just a boy's adventure book (how it was first presented to me), but both elements are in there: good story-telling and depiction of different world views. > On Oct 4, 2016, at 6:29 PM, Bruce Redwine wrote: > > Richard, you?ve mentioned Kipling?s Kim before in this context. I?ll have to reread it in the way you suggest. I must have missed something, but I can imagine what Said probably said. I wonder why Durrell didn?t keep Forster?s Passage to India as a ?bedside book.? It seems equally relevant. Forster, by the way, didn?t like Durrell and his brand of Romanticism and didn?t say nice things about him in private. Durrell, on the other hand, was very gracious towards E. M. > > Bruce > > > > > >> On Oct 4, 2016, at 2:29 PM, Richard Pine wrote: >> >> To appreciate the east-west tension in LD - and particularly the Quintet - it's helpful to look at Kipling's Kim - which LD called his 'bedside book' - and to look also at the ways western critics have tried to engage with this tension - and then to look at the ways non-western critics like Said and Chaudhuri have read Kim. >> RP >> >>> On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 12:19 AM, Bruce Redwine wrote: >>> Ravi, >>> >>> I like the contrast between Durrell?s Constance and Tennyson?s ?Ulysses?: to yield v. not to yield. I think you?re absolutely right in this. That?s the Indian metaphysics of Durrell?s philosophy, which is very un-Western. As to the rest of the Quintet, it has so many aspects (and defects) that readers will be puzzling over these for years to come. I don?t think, however, that Durrell himself was ever ?happy.? In this regard, he was Odyssean, ?to strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.? What he advocated was not necessarily what he practiced. >>> >>> Bruce >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> On Sep 28, 2016, at 8:14 PM, Ravi Nambiar wrote: >>>> >>>> Bruce >>>> Thanks for your expert comments. You are hundred percent right. The Quintet may/will get the fate of The Revolt. I don't speak authoritatively at all. I am a humble admirer of Durrell. I just quoted Durrell's own words (so that I can escape) only to show that he had not anticipated a Quartet-type audience for his Quintet ("The book is really written for learned people."); and, in spite of that, he claimed this novel his best. My only contention is that it is too early to write off this novel as a failure. Also, there are some fine parts which our young scholars could/should pursue. Our negative (final) judgement should not, I feel, discourage anyone from going into its by-lanes. For example, I liked the contrast Durrell made to the concept of Victorian heroism with a/the modern heroism: replacing the slogan, "to strive, to seek, to find and not to yield" with the slogan, "to surrender, to yield, to abdicate and receive" (Constance 269). I don't think substituting the heroism of Ulysses with that of a Yogi is any kind of philosophy or a bad philosophy. Yoga is popular now. Durrell's concern was to make his character seek happiness, inner happiness, a kind of"bliss-side up" life (the first half of the novel was the war-ridden world). That is why I called his novel "Eudaemonistic" novel, the type of novel making its theme as a system of ethics that evaluates actions (heroism) in terms of their capacity to produce happiness. The Quintet may be a failure, but, it certainly gives some narrative clues to future writers. We have had enough of realism, surrealism, magic realism, and so on. Why not try metarealism also? >>>> My apology to all those who disagree with me. Let us agree to disagree for the sake of literature. >>>> Best >>>> Ravi > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pinedurrellcorfu at gmail.com Wed Oct 5 07:38:54 2016 From: pinedurrellcorfu at gmail.com (Richard Pine) Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 17:38:54 +0300 Subject: [ilds] Evaluating the Quintet In-Reply-To: References: <66DAA229-D4C8-4E01-A977-DA6E61EEFFA4@earthlink.net> Message-ID: The essence of KIM is twofold: the "Game" and the "Quest" - it chimes with what LD himself wrote (In Tunc-Nunquam" that the 3 elements in any story are: Quests, Confessions and Puzzles. Kim is part of the "Great Game" for control of India's northwest frontier, and his Quest - to discover "Who is Kim?" merges with that of the Lama for the "River of the Arrow". Worth watching the 2 film versions - 1950, with Errol Flynn (as Mahbub Ali) and 1984 with Peter O'Toole as the Lama). RP On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 4:59 PM, Frederick Schoff wrote: > > I'm reading "Kim" for the first time as an adult. It's not hard to see the > east/west contrast. I imagine LD loved the boisterous and colorful aspects > of it (is this part and parcel of the "romanticism" Forster didn't like?). > Also, I think, the idea of a "Great Game" as the armature and animator of a > story impressed Durrell. I first read the Quartet for its overall lushness > and the interactions and thoughts of the characters. But "Palestine" ruled > over all the action, gave shape and defined the parameters of the story. In > the Quintet it's the Templars and their rumored treasure. In addition to > other aspects, I think "Kim" taught Durrell some key lessons about pure > story-telling. Sure, "Kim" might be just a boy's adventure book (how it was > first presented to me), but both elements are in there: good story-telling > and depiction of different world views. > > > On Oct 4, 2016, at 6:29 PM, Bruce Redwine > wrote: > > Richard, you?ve mentioned Kipling?s *Kim* before in this context. I?ll > have to reread it in the way you suggest. I must have missed something, > but I can imagine what Said probably said. I wonder why Durrell didn?t > keep Forster?s *Passage to India* as a ?bedside book.? It seems equally > relevant. Forster, by the way, didn?t like Durrell and his brand of > Romanticism and didn?t say nice things about him in private. Durrell, on > the other hand, was very gracious towards E. M. > > Bruce > > > > > > On Oct 4, 2016, at 2:29 PM, Richard Pine > wrote: > > To appreciate the east-west tension in LD - and particularly the Quintet - > it's helpful to look at Kipling's *Kim* - which LD called his 'bedside > book' - and to look also at the ways western critics have tried to engage > with this tension - and then to look at the ways non-western critics like > Said and Chaudhuri have read *Kim*. > RP > > On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 12:19 AM, Bruce Redwine > wrote: > >> Ravi, >> >> I like the contrast between Durrell?s *Constance* and Tennyson?s >> ?Ulysses?: to yield v. not to yield. I think you?re absolutely right in >> this. That?s the Indian metaphysics of Durrell?s philosophy, which is very >> un-Western. As to the rest of the *Quintet,* it has so many aspects >> (and defects) that readers will be puzzling over these for years to come. >> I don?t think, however, that Durrell himself was ever ?happy.? In this >> regard, he was Odyssean, ?to strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.? >> What he advocated was not necessarily what he practiced. >> >> Bruce >> >> >> >> >> On Sep 28, 2016, at 8:14 PM, Ravi Nambiar wrote: >> >> Bruce >> Thanks for your expert comments. You are hundred percent right.* The >> Quintet* may/will get the fate of *The Revolt*. I don't speak >> authoritatively at all. I am a humble admirer of Durrell. I just quoted >> Durrell's own words (so that I can escape) only to show that he had not >> anticipated a Quartet-type audience for his Quintet ("The book is really >> written for learned people."); and, in spite of that, he claimed this >> novel his best. My only contention is that it is too early to write off >> this novel as a failure. Also, there are some fine parts which our young >> scholars could/should pursue. Our negative (final) judgement should not, I >> feel, discourage anyone from going into its by-lanes. For example, I liked >> the contrast Durrell made to the concept of Victorian heroism with a/the >> modern heroism: replacing the slogan, "to strive, to seek, to find and not >> to yield" with the slogan, "to surrender, to yield, to abdicate and >> receive" (*Constance* 269). I don't think substituting the heroism of >> Ulysses with that of a Yogi is any kind of philosophy or a bad philosophy. >> Yoga is popular now. Durrell's concern was to make his character seek >> happiness, inner happiness, a kind of"bliss-side up" life (the first half >> of the novel was the war-ridden world). That is why I called his novel >> "Eudaemonistic" novel, the type of novel making its theme as a system of >> ethics that evaluates actions (heroism) in terms of their capacity to produce >> happiness. The Quintet may be a failure, but, it certainly gives some >> narrative clues to future writers. We have had enough of realism, >> surrealism, magic realism, and so on. Why not try metarealism also? >> My apology to all those who disagree with me. Let us agree to disagree >> for the sake of literature. >> Best >> Ravi >> >> > _______________________________________________ > 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: From bredwine1968 at earthlink.net Wed Oct 5 09:04:20 2016 From: bredwine1968 at earthlink.net (Bruce Redwine) Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 09:04:20 -0700 Subject: [ilds] Kipling's Kim v. Forster's Passage In-Reply-To: References: <66DAA229-D4C8-4E01-A977-DA6E61EEFFA4@earthlink.net> Message-ID: Yes, Durrell identified with Kipling?s Kim as a model for his boyhood experiences in India. That?s Romanticism on a superficial level?that?s postcard India. As Rick points out, Kipling also taught Durrell a lot about storytelling?and both are expert storytellers. But I would argue that Forster?s Passage to India provided a more profound model for the Indian ?metaphysics? Durrell later explored in his allegorical fiction. (Forster?s Alexandria and Pharos and Pharillon also fit in here.) This is the India Ravi Nambiar discusses. Consider Forster?s opening to Passage?the Marabar Caves and whatever it is that happens inside them. Durrell uses caves to similar effect in The Dark Labyrinth and the Quintet. Those kinds of mysterious or mystical experiences permeate his work. Bruce > On Oct 4, 2016, at 11:03 PM, Richard Pine wrote: > > I think what continued to resonate with LD about "Kim" was the fact that like Kipling LD had been born there and as we know deeply resented 'losing' his Indian childhood; that Kim was, as LD supposed himself to be, Anglo-Irish; and that he had known something of Kim's early years - Walsh in Pied Piper of Lovers has a lot in common with Kim. On the other hand, Forster was a 'travel writer' in India and however much he empathised with Indians, he didn't have that background. See what LD says about Kim, quoted in my book "Mindscape" (readable online on the DLC website - pp. 43-46 and 123-126 especially). > RP > > On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 1:29 AM, Bruce Redwine > wrote: > Richard, you?ve mentioned Kipling?s Kim before in this context. I?ll have to reread it in the way you suggest. I must have missed something, but I can imagine what Said probably said. I wonder why Durrell didn?t keep Forster?s Passage to India as a ?bedside book.? It seems equally relevant. Forster, by the way, didn?t like Durrell and his brand of Romanticism and didn?t say nice things about him in private. Durrell, on the other hand, was very gracious towards E. M. > > Bruce > > Rick Schoff on 10/5/2016: I'm reading "Kim" for the first time as an adult. It's not hard to see the east/west contrast. I imagine LD loved the boisterous and colorful aspects of it (is this part and parcel of the "romanticism" Forster didn't like?). Also, I think, the idea of a "Great Game" as the armature and animator of a story impressed Durrell. I first read the Quartet for its overall lushness and the interactions and thoughts of the characters. But "Palestine" ruled over all the action, gave shape and defined the parameters of the story. In the Quintet it's the Templars and their rumored treasure. In addition to other aspects, I think "Kim" taught Durrell some key lessons about pure story-telling. Sure, "Kim" might be just a boy's adventure book (how it was first presented to me), but both elements are in there: good story-telling and depiction of different world views. On Oct 4, 2016, at 6:29 PM, Bruce Redwine > wrote: > Richard, you?ve mentioned Kipling?s Kim before in this context. I?ll have to reread it in the way you suggest. I must have missed something, but I can imagine what Said probably said. I wonder why Durrell didn?t keep Forster?s Passage to India as a ?bedside book.? It seems equally relevant. Forster, by the way, didn?t like Durrell and his brand of Romanticism and didn?t say nice things about him in private. Durrell, on the other hand, was very gracious towards E. M. > > Bruce > > > >> On Oct 4, 2016, at 2:29 PM, Richard Pine > wrote: >> >> To appreciate the east-west tension in LD - and particularly the Quintet - it's helpful to look at Kipling's Kim - which LD called his 'bedside book' - and to look also at the ways western critics have tried to engage with this tension - and then to look at the ways non-western critics like Said and Chaudhuri have read Kim. >> RP >> >> On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 12:19 AM, Bruce Redwine > wrote: >> Ravi, >> >> I like the contrast between Durrell?s Constance and Tennyson?s ?Ulysses?: to yield v. not to yield. I think you?re absolutely right in this. That?s the Indian metaphysics of Durrell?s philosophy, which is very un-Western. As to the rest of the Quintet, it has so many aspects (and defects) that readers will be puzzling over these for years to come. I don?t think, however, that Durrell himself was ever ?happy.? In this regard, he was Odyssean, ?to strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.? What he advocated was not necessarily what he practiced. >> >> Bruce >> >> >> >>> On Sep 28, 2016, at 8:14 PM, Ravi Nambiar > wrote: >>> >>> Bruce >>> Thanks for your expert comments. You are hundred percent right. The Quintet may/will get the fate of The Revolt. I don't speak authoritatively at all. I am a humble admirer of Durrell. I just quoted Durrell's own words (so that I can escape) only to show that he had not anticipated a Quartet-type audience for his Quintet ("The book is really written for learned people."); and, in spite of that, he claimed this novel his best. My only contention is that it is too early to write off this novel as a failure. Also, there are some fine parts which our young scholars could/should pursue. Our negative (final) judgement should not, I feel, discourage anyone from going into its by-lanes. For example, I liked the contrast Durrell made to the concept of Victorian heroism with a/the modern heroism: replacing the slogan, "to strive, to seek, to find and not to yield" with the slogan, "to surrender, to yield, to abdicate and receive" (Constance 269). I don't think substituting the heroism of Ulysses with that of a Yogi is any kind of philosophy or a bad philosophy. Yoga is popular now. Durrell's concern was to make his character seek happiness, inner happiness, a kind of"bliss-side up" life (the first half of the novel was the war-ridden world). That is why I called his novel "Eudaemonistic" novel, the type of novel making its theme as a system of ethics that evaluates actions (heroism) in terms of their capacity to produce happiness. The Quintet may be a failure, but, it certainly gives some narrative clues to future writers. We have had enough of realism, surrealism, magic realism, and so on. Why not try metarealism also? >>> My apology to all those who disagree with me. Let us agree to disagree for the sake of literature. >>> Best >>> Ravi >>> > > _______________________________________________ > > >> On Oct 4, 2016, at 2:29 PM, Richard Pine > wrote: >> >> To appreciate the east-west tension in LD - and particularly the Quintet - it's helpful to look at Kipling's Kim - which LD called his 'bedside book' - and to look also at the ways western critics have tried to engage with this tension - and then to look at the ways non-western critics like Said and Chaudhuri have read Kim. >> RP >> >> On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 12:19 AM, Bruce Redwine > wrote: >> Ravi, >> >> I like the contrast between Durrell?s Constance and Tennyson?s ?Ulysses?: to yield v. not to yield. I think you?re absolutely right in this. That?s the Indian metaphysics of Durrell?s philosophy, which is very un-Western. As to the rest of the Quintet, it has so many aspects (and defects) that readers will be puzzling over these for years to come. I don?t think, however, that Durrell himself was ever ?happy.? In this regard, he was Odyssean, ?to strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.? What he advocated was not necessarily what he practiced. >> >> Bruce >> >> >> >> >>> On Sep 28, 2016, at 8:14 PM, Ravi Nambiar > wrote: >>> >>> Bruce >>> Thanks for your expert comments. You are hundred percent right. The Quintet may/will get the fate of The Revolt. I don't speak authoritatively at all. I am a humble admirer of Durrell. I just quoted Durrell's own words (so that I can escape) only to show that he had not anticipated a Quartet-type audience for his Quintet ("The book is really written for learned people."); and, in spite of that, he claimed this novel his best. My only contention is that it is too early to write off this novel as a failure. Also, there are some fine parts which our young scholars could/should pursue. Our negative (final) judgement should not, I feel, discourage anyone from going into its by-lanes. For example, I liked the contrast Durrell made to the concept of Victorian heroism with a/the modern heroism: replacing the slogan, "to strive, to seek, to find and not to yield" with the slogan, "to surrender, to yield, to abdicate and receive" (Constance 269). I don't think substituting the heroism of Ulysses with that of a Yogi is any kind of philosophy or a bad philosophy. Yoga is popular now. Durrell's concern was to make his character seek happiness, inner happiness, a kind of"bliss-side up" life (the first half of the novel was the war-ridden world). That is why I called his novel "Eudaemonistic" novel, the type of novel making its theme as a system of ethics that evaluates actions (heroism) in terms of their capacity to produce happiness. The Quintet may be a failure, but, it certainly gives some narrative clues to future writers. We have had enough of realism, surrealism, magic realism, and so on. Why not try metarealism also? >>> My apology to all those who disagree with me. Let us agree to disagree for the sake of literature. >>> Best >>> Ravi >>> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pinedurrellcorfu at gmail.com Wed Oct 5 09:36:03 2016 From: pinedurrellcorfu at gmail.com (Richard Pine) Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 19:36:03 +0300 Subject: [ilds] Kipling's Kim v. Forster's Passage In-Reply-To: References: <66DAA229-D4C8-4E01-A977-DA6E61EEFFA4@earthlink.net> Message-ID: "Yes, Durrell identified with Kipling?s *Kim* as a model for his boyhood experiences in India. That?s Romanticism on a superficial level?that?s postcard India." Absolutely not! If it was a postcard, it was a postcard born inside his head - a veritable smile in his mind's eye. It wasn't at all romantic, with or without a capital 'R' and it wasn't in the slightest superficial. India MEANT something to him at first-hand and it imbued his entire life and life-vision. Read what he wrote about the lamas in his introduction to the (first) biog of Alexandra David-Neel by the Foster couple. RP On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 7:04 PM, Bruce Redwine wrote: > Yes, Durrell identified with Kipling?s *Kim* as a model for his boyhood > experiences in India. That?s Romanticism on a superficial level?that?s > postcard India. As Rick points out, Kipling also taught Durrell a lot > about storytelling?and both are expert storytellers. But I would argue > that Forster?s *Passage to India* provided a more profound model for the > Indian ?metaphysics? Durrell later explored in his allegorical fiction. > (Forster?s *Alexandria* and *Pharos and Pharillon* also fit in here.) > This is the India Ravi Nambiar discusses. Consider Forster?s opening to > *Passage*?the Marabar Caves and whatever it is that happens inside them. > Durrell uses caves to similar effect in *The Dark Labyrinth* and the > *Quintet*. Those kinds of mysterious or mystical experiences permeate > his work. > > Bruce > > > > On Oct 4, 2016, at 11:03 PM, Richard Pine > wrote: > > I think what continued to resonate with LD about "Kim" was the fact that > like Kipling LD had been born there and as we know deeply resented 'losing' > his Indian childhood; that Kim was, as LD supposed himself to be, > Anglo-Irish; and that he had known something of Kim's early years - Walsh > in Pied Piper of Lovers has a lot in common with Kim. On the other hand, > Forster was a 'travel writer' in India and however much he empathised with > Indians, he didn't have that background. See what LD says about Kim, quoted > in my book "Mindscape" (readable online on the DLC website - pp. 43-46 and > 123-126 especially). > RP > > On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 1:29 AM, Bruce Redwine > wrote: > >> Richard, you?ve mentioned Kipling?s *Kim* before in this context. I?ll >> have to reread it in the way you suggest. I must have missed something, >> but I can imagine what Said probably said. I wonder why Durrell didn?t >> keep Forster?s *Passage to India* as a ?bedside book.? It seems equally >> relevant. Forster, by the way, didn?t like Durrell and his brand of >> Romanticism and didn?t say nice things about him in private. Durrell, on >> the other hand, was very gracious towards E. M. >> >> Bruce >> > > > >> Rick Schoff on 10/5/2016: >> > > I'm reading "Kim" for the first time as an adult. It's not hard to see the > east/west contrast. I imagine LD loved the boisterous and colorful aspects > of it (is this part and parcel of the "romanticism" Forster didn't like?). > Also, I think, the idea of a "Great Game" as the armature and animator of a > story impressed Durrell. I first read the Quartet for its overall lushness > and the interactions and thoughts of the characters. But "Palestine" ruled > over all the action, gave shape and defined the parameters of the story. In > the Quintet it's the Templars and their rumored treasure. In addition to > other aspects, I think "Kim" taught Durrell some key lessons about pure > story-telling. Sure, "Kim" might be just a boy's adventure book (how it was > first presented to me), but both elements are in there: good story-telling > and depiction of different world views. > > > On Oct 4, 2016, at 6:29 PM, Bruce Redwine > wrote: > > Richard, you?ve mentioned Kipling?s *Kim* before in this context. I?ll > have to reread it in the way you suggest. I must have missed something, > but I can imagine what Said probably said. I wonder why Durrell didn?t > keep Forster?s *Passage to India* as a ?bedside book.? It seems equally > relevant. Forster, by the way, didn?t like Durrell and his brand of > Romanticism and didn?t say nice things about him in private. Durrell, on > the other hand, was very gracious towards E. M. > > Bruce > > > > On Oct 4, 2016, at 2:29 PM, Richard Pine > wrote: > > To appreciate the east-west tension in LD - and particularly the Quintet - > it's helpful to look at Kipling's *Kim* - which LD called his 'bedside > book' - and to look also at the ways western critics have tried to engage > with this tension - and then to look at the ways non-western critics like > Said and Chaudhuri have read *Kim*. > RP > > On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 12:19 AM, Bruce Redwine > wrote: > >> Ravi, >> >> I like the contrast between Durrell?s *Constance* and Tennyson?s >> ?Ulysses?: to yield v. not to yield. I think you?re absolutely right in >> this. That?s the Indian metaphysics of Durrell?s philosophy, which is very >> un-Western. As to the rest of the *Quintet,* it has so many aspects >> (and defects) that readers will be puzzling over these for years to come. >> I don?t think, however, that Durrell himself was ever ?happy.? In this >> regard, he was Odyssean, ?to strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.? >> What he advocated was not necessarily what he practiced. >> >> Bruce >> >> >> >> On Sep 28, 2016, at 8:14 PM, Ravi Nambiar wrote: >> >> Bruce >> Thanks for your expert comments. You are hundred percent right.* The >> Quintet* may/will get the fate of *The Revolt*. I don't speak >> authoritatively at all. I am a humble admirer of Durrell. I just quoted >> Durrell's own words (so that I can escape) only to show that he had not >> anticipated a Quartet-type audience for his Quintet ("The book is really >> written for learned people."); and, in spite of that, he claimed this >> novel his best. My only contention is that it is too early to write off >> this novel as a failure. Also, there are some fine parts which our young >> scholars could/should pursue. Our negative (final) judgement should not, I >> feel, discourage anyone from going into its by-lanes. For example, I liked >> the contrast Durrell made to the concept of Victorian heroism with a/the >> modern heroism: replacing the slogan, "to strive, to seek, to find and not >> to yield" with the slogan, "to surrender, to yield, to abdicate and >> receive" (*Constance* 269). I don't think substituting the heroism of >> Ulysses with that of a Yogi is any kind of philosophy or a bad philosophy. >> Yoga is popular now. Durrell's concern was to make his character seek >> happiness, inner happiness, a kind of"bliss-side up" life (the first half >> of the novel was the war-ridden world). That is why I called his novel >> "Eudaemonistic" novel, the type of novel making its theme as a system of >> ethics that evaluates actions (heroism) in terms of their capacity to produce >> happiness. The Quintet may be a failure, but, it certainly gives some >> narrative clues to future writers. We have had enough of realism, >> surrealism, magic realism, and so on. Why not try metarealism also? >> My apology to all those who disagree with me. Let us agree to disagree >> for the sake of literature. >> Best >> Ravi >> >> > _______________________________________________ > > >> >> On Oct 4, 2016, at 2:29 PM, Richard Pine >> wrote: >> >> To appreciate the east-west tension in LD - and particularly the Quintet >> - it's helpful to look at Kipling's *Kim* - which LD called his 'bedside >> book' - and to look also at the ways western critics have tried to engage >> with this tension - and then to look at the ways non-western critics like >> Said and Chaudhuri have read *Kim*. >> RP >> >> On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 12:19 AM, Bruce Redwine < >> bredwine1968 at earthlink.net> wrote: >> >>> Ravi, >>> >>> I like the contrast between Durrell?s *Constance* and Tennyson?s >>> ?Ulysses?: to yield v. not to yield. I think you?re absolutely right in >>> this. That?s the Indian metaphysics of Durrell?s philosophy, which is very >>> un-Western. As to the rest of the *Quintet,* it has so many aspects >>> (and defects) that readers will be puzzling over these for years to come. >>> I don?t think, however, that Durrell himself was ever ?happy.? In this >>> regard, he was Odyssean, ?to strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.? >>> What he advocated was not necessarily what he practiced. >>> >>> Bruce >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sep 28, 2016, at 8:14 PM, Ravi Nambiar wrote: >>> >>> Bruce >>> Thanks for your expert comments. You are hundred percent right.* The >>> Quintet* may/will get the fate of *The Revolt*. I don't speak >>> authoritatively at all. I am a humble admirer of Durrell. I just quoted >>> Durrell's own words (so that I can escape) only to show that he had not >>> anticipated a Quartet-type audience for his Quintet ("The book is >>> really written for learned people."); and, in spite of that, he claimed >>> this novel his best. My only contention is that it is too early to write >>> off this novel as a failure. Also, there are some fine parts which our >>> young scholars could/should pursue. Our negative (final) judgement should >>> not, I feel, discourage anyone from going into its by-lanes. For example, I >>> liked the contrast Durrell made to the concept of Victorian heroism with >>> a/the modern heroism: replacing the slogan, "to strive, to seek, to find >>> and not to yield" with the slogan, "to surrender, to yield, to abdicate and >>> receive" (*Constance* 269). I don't think substituting the heroism of >>> Ulysses with that of a Yogi is any kind of philosophy or a bad philosophy. >>> Yoga is popular now. Durrell's concern was to make his character seek >>> happiness, inner happiness, a kind of"bliss-side up" life (the first half >>> of the novel was the war-ridden world). That is why I called his novel >>> "Eudaemonistic" novel, the type of novel making its theme as a system of >>> ethics that evaluates actions (heroism) in terms of their capacity to produce >>> happiness. The Quintet may be a failure, but, it certainly gives some >>> narrative clues to future writers. We have had enough of realism, >>> surrealism, magic realism, and so on. Why not try metarealism also? >>> My apology to all those who disagree with me. Let us agree to disagree >>> for the sake of literature. >>> Best >>> Ravi >>> >>> >> > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bredwine1968 at earthlink.net Wed Oct 5 11:34:56 2016 From: bredwine1968 at earthlink.net (Bruce Redwine) Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 11:34:56 -0700 Subject: [ilds] Kipling's Kim v. Forster's Passage In-Reply-To: References: <66DAA229-D4C8-4E01-A977-DA6E61EEFFA4@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <1A1376ED-305B-403F-B284-546A376FFE6D@earthlink.net> I don?t disagree that India ?meant? a lot to Durrell. But I think we need to distinguish between the dreamy glow of childhood experiences (? la Wordsworth?s 1799 Prelude) and the deep reflections of a mature man (? la Wordsworth?s ?Intimations Ode?). There?s a reason Durrell never returned to India (or reluctantly returned to Egypt)?I would guess that he didn?t want to disturb or destroy some cherished memories, which, after all, is common to all us. As Thomas Wolfe says, ?You can?t go home again.? E. M. Forster?s India, in my opinion, is closer to the India of mature Durrell, philosophic Durrell. When Durrell talked about the India of his childhood, as in his essay ?From the Elephant?s Back? (1982), his recollections are full of fabrications. That India is, in part at least, a Romantic dream. Take the first lines of ?Le circle referm?,? one of Durrell?s last poems: ?Boom of the sunset gun / In the old fortress at Benares.? That very moving poem, which has the appearance of an autobiographical summation of a life, begins in Benares, India. If I?m not mistaken, Durrell the child was never in Benares. He was dreaming that experience, and we all know how important dreams are to Durrell. Bruce > On Oct 5, 2016, at 9:36 AM, Richard Pine wrote: > > "Yes, Durrell identified with Kipling?s Kim as a model for his boyhood experiences in India. That?s Romanticism on a superficial level?that?s postcard India." > Absolutely not! If it was a postcard, it was a postcard born inside his head - a veritable smile in his mind's eye. It wasn't at all romantic, with or without a capital 'R' and it wasn't in the slightest superficial. India MEANT something to him at first-hand and it imbued his entire life and life-vision. Read what he wrote about the lamas in his introduction to the (first) biog of Alexandra David-Neel by the Foster couple. > RP > > On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 7:04 PM, Bruce Redwine > wrote: > Yes, Durrell identified with Kipling?s Kim as a model for his boyhood experiences in India. That?s Romanticism on a superficial level?that?s postcard India. As Rick points out, Kipling also taught Durrell a lot about storytelling?and both are expert storytellers. But I would argue that Forster?s Passage to India provided a more profound model for the Indian ?metaphysics? Durrell later explored in his allegorical fiction. (Forster?s Alexandria and Pharos and Pharillon also fit in here.) This is the India Ravi Nambiar discusses. Consider Forster?s opening to Passage?the Marabar Caves and whatever it is that happens inside them. Durrell uses caves to similar effect in The Dark Labyrinth and the Quintet. Those kinds of mysterious or mystical experiences permeate his work. > > Bruce > > > >> On Oct 4, 2016, at 11:03 PM, Richard Pine > wrote: >> >> I think what continued to resonate with LD about "Kim" was the fact that like Kipling LD had been born there and as we know deeply resented 'losing' his Indian childhood; that Kim was, as LD supposed himself to be, Anglo-Irish; and that he had known something of Kim's early years - Walsh in Pied Piper of Lovers has a lot in common with Kim. On the other hand, Forster was a 'travel writer' in India and however much he empathised with Indians, he didn't have that background. See what LD says about Kim, quoted in my book "Mindscape" (readable online on the DLC website - pp. 43-46 and 123-126 especially). >> RP >> >> On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 1:29 AM, Bruce Redwine > wrote: >> Richard, you?ve mentioned Kipling?s Kim before in this context. I?ll have to reread it in the way you suggest. I must have missed something, but I can imagine what Said probably said. I wonder why Durrell didn?t keep Forster?s Passage to India as a ?bedside book.? It seems equally relevant. Forster, by the way, didn?t like Durrell and his brand of Romanticism and didn?t say nice things about him in private. Durrell, on the other hand, was very gracious towards E. M. >> >> Bruce > > >> >> Rick Schoff on 10/5/2016: > > I'm reading "Kim" for the first time as an adult. It's not hard to see the east/west contrast. I imagine LD loved the boisterous and colorful aspects of it (is this part and parcel of the "romanticism" Forster didn't like?). Also, I think, the idea of a "Great Game" as the armature and animator of a story impressed Durrell. I first read the Quartet for its overall lushness and the interactions and thoughts of the characters. But "Palestine" ruled over all the action, gave shape and defined the parameters of the story. In the Quintet it's the Templars and their rumored treasure. In addition to other aspects, I think "Kim" taught Durrell some key lessons about pure story-telling. Sure, "Kim" might be just a boy's adventure book (how it was first presented to me), but both elements are in there: good story-telling and depiction of different world views. > > > On Oct 4, 2016, at 6:29 PM, Bruce Redwine > wrote: > >> Richard, you?ve mentioned Kipling?s Kim before in this context. I?ll have to reread it in the way you suggest. I must have missed something, but I can imagine what Said probably said. I wonder why Durrell didn?t keep Forster?s Passage to India as a ?bedside book.? It seems equally relevant. Forster, by the way, didn?t like Durrell and his brand of Romanticism and didn?t say nice things about him in private. Durrell, on the other hand, was very gracious towards E. M. >> >> Bruce >> >> >> >>> On Oct 4, 2016, at 2:29 PM, Richard Pine > wrote: >>> >>> To appreciate the east-west tension in LD - and particularly the Quintet - it's helpful to look at Kipling's Kim - which LD called his 'bedside book' - and to look also at the ways western critics have tried to engage with this tension - and then to look at the ways non-western critics like Said and Chaudhuri have read Kim. >>> RP >>> >>> On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 12:19 AM, Bruce Redwine > wrote: >>> Ravi, >>> >>> I like the contrast between Durrell?s Constance and Tennyson?s ?Ulysses?: to yield v. not to yield. I think you?re absolutely right in this. That?s the Indian metaphysics of Durrell?s philosophy, which is very un-Western. As to the rest of the Quintet, it has so many aspects (and defects) that readers will be puzzling over these for years to come. I don?t think, however, that Durrell himself was ever ?happy.? In this regard, he was Odyssean, ?to strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.? What he advocated was not necessarily what he practiced. >>> >>> Bruce >>> >>> >>> >>>> On Sep 28, 2016, at 8:14 PM, Ravi Nambiar > wrote: >>>> >>>> Bruce >>>> Thanks for your expert comments. You are hundred percent right. The Quintet may/will get the fate of The Revolt. I don't speak authoritatively at all. I am a humble admirer of Durrell. I just quoted Durrell's own words (so that I can escape) only to show that he had not anticipated a Quartet-type audience for his Quintet ("The book is really written for learned people."); and, in spite of that, he claimed this novel his best. My only contention is that it is too early to write off this novel as a failure. Also, there are some fine parts which our young scholars could/should pursue. Our negative (final) judgement should not, I feel, discourage anyone from going into its by-lanes. For example, I liked the contrast Durrell made to the concept of Victorian heroism with a/the modern heroism: replacing the slogan, "to strive, to seek, to find and not to yield" with the slogan, "to surrender, to yield, to abdicate and receive" (Constance 269). I don't think substituting the heroism of Ulysses with that of a Yogi is any kind of philosophy or a bad philosophy. Yoga is popular now. Durrell's concern was to make his character seek happiness, inner happiness, a kind of"bliss-side up" life (the first half of the novel was the war-ridden world). That is why I called his novel "Eudaemonistic" novel, the type of novel making its theme as a system of ethics that evaluates actions (heroism) in terms of their capacity to produce happiness. The Quintet may be a failure, but, it certainly gives some narrative clues to future writers. We have had enough of realism, surrealism, magic realism, and so on. Why not try metarealism also? >>>> My apology to all those who disagree with me. Let us agree to disagree for the sake of literature. >>>> Best >>>> Ravi >>>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> >>> On Oct 4, 2016, at 2:29 PM, Richard Pine > wrote: >>> >>> To appreciate the east-west tension in LD - and particularly the Quintet - it's helpful to look at Kipling's Kim - which LD called his 'bedside book' - and to look also at the ways western critics have tried to engage with this tension - and then to look at the ways non-western critics like Said and Chaudhuri have read Kim. >>> RP >>> >>> On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 12:19 AM, Bruce Redwine > wrote: >>> Ravi, >>> >>> I like the contrast between Durrell?s Constance and Tennyson?s ?Ulysses?: to yield v. not to yield. I think you?re absolutely right in this. That?s the Indian metaphysics of Durrell?s philosophy, which is very un-Western. As to the rest of the Quintet, it has so many aspects (and defects) that readers will be puzzling over these for years to come. I don?t think, however, that Durrell himself was ever ?happy.? In this regard, he was Odyssean, ?to strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.? What he advocated was not necessarily what he practiced. >>> >>> Bruce >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> On Sep 28, 2016, at 8:14 PM, Ravi Nambiar > wrote: >>>> >>>> Bruce >>>> Thanks for your expert comments. You are hundred percent right. The Quintet may/will get the fate of The Revolt. I don't speak authoritatively at all. I am a humble admirer of Durrell. I just quoted Durrell's own words (so that I can escape) only to show that he had not anticipated a Quartet-type audience for his Quintet ("The book is really written for learned people."); and, in spite of that, he claimed this novel his best. My only contention is that it is too early to write off this novel as a failure. Also, there are some fine parts which our young scholars could/should pursue. Our negative (final) judgement should not, I feel, discourage anyone from going into its by-lanes. For example, I liked the contrast Durrell made to the concept of Victorian heroism with a/the modern heroism: replacing the slogan, "to strive, to seek, to find and not to yield" with the slogan, "to surrender, to yield, to abdicate and receive" (Constance 269). I don't think substituting the heroism of Ulysses with that of a Yogi is any kind of philosophy or a bad philosophy. Yoga is popular now. Durrell's concern was to make his character seek happiness, inner happiness, a kind of"bliss-side up" life (the first half of the novel was the war-ridden world). That is why I called his novel "Eudaemonistic" novel, the type of novel making its theme as a system of ethics that evaluates actions (heroism) in terms of their capacity to produce happiness. The Quintet may be a failure, but, it certainly gives some narrative clues to future writers. We have had enough of realism, surrealism, magic realism, and so on. Why not try metarealism also? >>>> My apology to all those who disagree with me. Let us agree to disagree for the sake of literature. >>>> Best >>>> Ravi >>>> >> > > > _______________________________________________ > 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: From pinedurrellcorfu at gmail.com Wed Oct 5 12:05:48 2016 From: pinedurrellcorfu at gmail.com (Richard Pine) Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 22:05:48 +0300 Subject: [ilds] Kipling's Kim v. Forster's Passage In-Reply-To: <1A1376ED-305B-403F-B284-546A376FFE6D@earthlink.net> References: <66DAA229-D4C8-4E01-A977-DA6E61EEFFA4@earthlink.net> <1A1376ED-305B-403F-B284-546A376FFE6D@earthlink.net> Message-ID: As Thomas Wolfe says, ?You can?t go home again.? Also, think of "the boy who left home will have to meet the man who returns" But I continue to argue that Kipling meant more to LD than Forster ever could, because Kipling's 'India' was felt, whereas Forster's 'India', like his 'Alexandria', was intuited. To rely on the latter is perilously close to prioritising theory over that which is theoritised - which is one of the great sins (alright, moral errors) of modern academe. Yes, Elephant's Back bends the truth - have you forgotten that LD was a) a poet and b) a storyteller? And what man can accurately recall childhood? If LD had written "Boom of the sunset gun / In the old fortress of Kurseong" would you object, because there IS no fortress at Kurseong? RP On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 9:34 PM, Bruce Redwine wrote: > I don?t disagree that India ?meant? a lot to Durrell. But I think we need > to distinguish between the dreamy glow of childhood experiences (? la > Wordsworth?s 1799 *Prelude*) and the deep reflections of a mature man (? > la Wordsworth?s ?Intimations Ode?). There?s a reason Durrell never > returned to India (or reluctantly returned to Egypt)?I would guess that he > didn?t want to disturb or destroy some cherished memories, which, after > all, is common to all us. As Thomas Wolfe says, ?You can?t go home again.? > E. M. Forster?s India, in my opinion, is closer to the India of mature > Durrell, philosophic Durrell. When Durrell talked about the India of his > childhood, as in his essay ?From the Elephant?s Back? (1982), his > recollections are full of fabrications. *That* India is, in part at > least, a Romantic dream. Take the first lines of ?Le circle referm?,? one > of Durrell?s last poems: ?Boom of the sunset gun / In the old fortress at > Benares.? That very moving poem, which has the appearance of an > autobiographical summation of a life, begins in Benares, India. If I?m not > mistaken, Durrell the child was *never* in Benares. He was dreaming that > experience, and we all know how important dreams are to Durrell. > > Bruce > > > > > > > On Oct 5, 2016, at 9:36 AM, Richard Pine > wrote: > > "Yes, Durrell identified with Kipling?s *Kim* as a model for his boyhood > experiences in India. That?s Romanticism on a superficial level?that?s > postcard India." > Absolutely not! If it was a postcard, it was a postcard born inside his > head - a veritable smile in his mind's eye. It wasn't at all romantic, with > or without a capital 'R' and it wasn't in the slightest superficial. India > MEANT something to him at first-hand and it imbued his entire life and > life-vision. Read what he wrote about the lamas in his introduction to the > (first) biog of Alexandra David-Neel by the Foster couple. > RP > > On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 7:04 PM, Bruce Redwine > wrote: > >> Yes, Durrell identified with Kipling?s *Kim* as a model for his boyhood >> experiences in India. That?s Romanticism on a superficial level?that?s >> postcard India. As Rick points out, Kipling also taught Durrell a lot >> about storytelling?and both are expert storytellers. But I would argue >> that Forster?s *Passage to India* provided a more profound model for the >> Indian ?metaphysics? Durrell later explored in his allegorical fiction. >> (Forster?s *Alexandria* and *Pharos and Pharillon* also fit in here.) >> This is the India Ravi Nambiar discusses. Consider Forster?s opening to >> *Passage*?the Marabar Caves and whatever it is that happens inside >> them. Durrell uses caves to similar effect in *The Dark Labyrinth* and >> the *Quintet*. Those kinds of mysterious or mystical experiences >> permeate his work. >> >> Bruce >> >> >> >> On Oct 4, 2016, at 11:03 PM, Richard Pine >> wrote: >> >> I think what continued to resonate with LD about "Kim" was the fact that >> like Kipling LD had been born there and as we know deeply resented 'losing' >> his Indian childhood; that Kim was, as LD supposed himself to be, >> Anglo-Irish; and that he had known something of Kim's early years - Walsh >> in Pied Piper of Lovers has a lot in common with Kim. On the other hand, >> Forster was a 'travel writer' in India and however much he empathised with >> Indians, he didn't have that background. See what LD says about Kim, quoted >> in my book "Mindscape" (readable online on the DLC website - pp. 43-46 and >> 123-126 especially). >> RP >> >> On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 1:29 AM, Bruce Redwine > > wrote: >> >>> Richard, you?ve mentioned Kipling?s *Kim* before in this context. I?ll >>> have to reread it in the way you suggest. I must have missed something, >>> but I can imagine what Said probably said. I wonder why Durrell didn?t >>> keep Forster?s *Passage to India* as a ?bedside book.? It seems >>> equally relevant. Forster, by the way, didn?t like Durrell and his brand >>> of Romanticism and didn?t say nice things about him in private. Durrell, >>> on the other hand, was very gracious towards E. M. >>> >>> Bruce >>> >> >> >> >>> Rick Schoff on 10/5/2016: >>> >> >> I'm reading "Kim" for the first time as an adult. It's not hard to see >> the east/west contrast. I imagine LD loved the boisterous and colorful >> aspects of it (is this part and parcel of the "romanticism" Forster didn't >> like?). Also, I think, the idea of a "Great Game" as the armature and >> animator of a story impressed Durrell. I first read the Quartet for its >> overall lushness and the interactions and thoughts of the characters. But >> "Palestine" ruled over all the action, gave shape and defined the >> parameters of the story. In the Quintet it's the Templars and their rumored >> treasure. In addition to other aspects, I think "Kim" taught Durrell some >> key lessons about pure story-telling. Sure, "Kim" might be just a boy's >> adventure book (how it was first presented to me), but both elements are in >> there: good story-telling and depiction of different world views. >> >> >> On Oct 4, 2016, at 6:29 PM, Bruce Redwine >> wrote: >> >> Richard, you?ve mentioned Kipling?s *Kim* before in this context. I?ll >> have to reread it in the way you suggest. I must have missed something, >> but I can imagine what Said probably said. I wonder why Durrell didn?t >> keep Forster?s *Passage to India* as a ?bedside book.? It seems equally >> relevant. Forster, by the way, didn?t like Durrell and his brand of >> Romanticism and didn?t say nice things about him in private. Durrell, on >> the other hand, was very gracious towards E. M. >> >> Bruce >> >> >> >> On Oct 4, 2016, at 2:29 PM, Richard Pine >> wrote: >> >> To appreciate the east-west tension in LD - and particularly the Quintet >> - it's helpful to look at Kipling's *Kim* - which LD called his 'bedside >> book' - and to look also at the ways western critics have tried to engage >> with this tension - and then to look at the ways non-western critics like >> Said and Chaudhuri have read *Kim*. >> RP >> >> On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 12:19 AM, Bruce Redwine > k.net> wrote: >> >>> Ravi, >>> >>> I like the contrast between Durrell?s *Constance* and Tennyson?s >>> ?Ulysses?: to yield v. not to yield. I think you?re absolutely right in >>> this. That?s the Indian metaphysics of Durrell?s philosophy, which is very >>> un-Western. As to the rest of the *Quintet,* it has so many aspects >>> (and defects) that readers will be puzzling over these for years to come. >>> I don?t think, however, that Durrell himself was ever ?happy.? In this >>> regard, he was Odyssean, ?to strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.? >>> What he advocated was not necessarily what he practiced. >>> >>> Bruce >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sep 28, 2016, at 8:14 PM, Ravi Nambiar wrote: >>> >>> Bruce >>> Thanks for your expert comments. You are hundred percent right.* The >>> Quintet* may/will get the fate of *The Revolt*. I don't speak >>> authoritatively at all. I am a humble admirer of Durrell. I just quoted >>> Durrell's own words (so that I can escape) only to show that he had not >>> anticipated a Quartet-type audience for his Quintet ("The book is >>> really written for learned people."); and, in spite of that, he claimed >>> this novel his best. My only contention is that it is too early to write >>> off this novel as a failure. Also, there are some fine parts which our >>> young scholars could/should pursue. Our negative (final) judgement should >>> not, I feel, discourage anyone from going into its by-lanes. For example, I >>> liked the contrast Durrell made to the concept of Victorian heroism with >>> a/the modern heroism: replacing the slogan, "to strive, to seek, to find >>> and not to yield" with the slogan, "to surrender, to yield, to abdicate and >>> receive" (*Constance* 269). I don't think substituting the heroism of >>> Ulysses with that of a Yogi is any kind of philosophy or a bad philosophy. >>> Yoga is popular now. Durrell's concern was to make his character seek >>> happiness, inner happiness, a kind of"bliss-side up" life (the first half >>> of the novel was the war-ridden world). That is why I called his novel >>> "Eudaemonistic" novel, the type of novel making its theme as a system of >>> ethics that evaluates actions (heroism) in terms of their capacity to produce >>> happiness. The Quintet may be a failure, but, it certainly gives some >>> narrative clues to future writers. We have had enough of realism, >>> surrealism, magic realism, and so on. Why not try metarealism also? >>> My apology to all those who disagree with me. Let us agree to disagree >>> for the sake of literature. >>> Best >>> Ravi >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> >>> >>> On Oct 4, 2016, at 2:29 PM, Richard Pine >>> wrote: >>> >>> To appreciate the east-west tension in LD - and particularly the Quintet >>> - it's helpful to look at Kipling's *Kim* - which LD called his >>> 'bedside book' - and to look also at the ways western critics have tried to >>> engage with this tension - and then to look at the ways non-western critics >>> like Said and Chaudhuri have read *Kim*. >>> RP >>> >>> On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 12:19 AM, Bruce Redwine < >>> bredwine1968 at earthlink.net> wrote: >>> >>>> Ravi, >>>> >>>> I like the contrast between Durrell?s *Constance* and Tennyson?s >>>> ?Ulysses?: to yield v. not to yield. I think you?re absolutely right in >>>> this. That?s the Indian metaphysics of Durrell?s philosophy, which is very >>>> un-Western. As to the rest of the *Quintet,* it has so many aspects >>>> (and defects) that readers will be puzzling over these for years to come. >>>> I don?t think, however, that Durrell himself was ever ?happy.? In this >>>> regard, he was Odyssean, ?to strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.? >>>> What he advocated was not necessarily what he practiced. >>>> >>>> Bruce >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sep 28, 2016, at 8:14 PM, Ravi Nambiar wrote: >>>> >>>> Bruce >>>> Thanks for your expert comments. You are hundred percent right.* The >>>> Quintet* may/will get the fate of *The Revolt*. I don't speak >>>> authoritatively at all. I am a humble admirer of Durrell. I just quoted >>>> Durrell's own words (so that I can escape) only to show that he had not >>>> anticipated a Quartet-type audience for his Quintet ("The book is >>>> really written for learned people."); and, in spite of that, he >>>> claimed this novel his best. My only contention is that it is too early to >>>> write off this novel as a failure. Also, there are some fine parts which >>>> our young scholars could/should pursue. Our negative (final) judgement >>>> should not, I feel, discourage anyone from going into its by-lanes. For >>>> example, I liked the contrast Durrell made to the concept of Victorian >>>> heroism with a/the modern heroism: replacing the slogan, "to strive, to >>>> seek, to find and not to yield" with the slogan, "to surrender, to yield, >>>> to abdicate and receive" (*Constance* 269). I don't think substituting >>>> the heroism of Ulysses with that of a Yogi is any kind of philosophy or a >>>> bad philosophy. Yoga is popular now. Durrell's concern was to make his >>>> character seek happiness, inner happiness, a kind of"bliss-side up" life >>>> (the first half of the novel was the war-ridden world). That is why I >>>> called his novel "Eudaemonistic" novel, the type of novel making its theme >>>> as a system of ethics that evaluates actions (heroism) in terms of >>>> their capacity to produce happiness. The Quintet may be a failure, >>>> but, it certainly gives some narrative clues to future writers. We have had >>>> enough of realism, surrealism, magic realism, and so on. Why not try >>>> metarealism also? >>>> My apology to all those who disagree with me. Let us agree to disagree >>>> for the sake of literature. >>>> Best >>>> Ravi >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > > > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From james.d.gifford at gmail.com Wed Oct 5 15:56:19 2016 From: james.d.gifford at gmail.com (James Gifford) Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 15:56:19 -0700 Subject: [ilds] Blog post on Durrell & Cyprus Message-ID: <917b249e-7598-3221-67c0-e25dfdbad178@gmail.com> Dear all, Maria Eliades has a new blog on Durrell's time on Cypus, "The Impact of Expat Writers in Uncertain Times: Lawrence Durrell," which will likely interest people on the listserv: http://blog.pshares.org/index.php/the-impact-of-expat-writers-in-uncertain-times-lawrence-durrell/ The relationship she makes between Durrell's experience and her own in Istanbul today is striking. All best, James From bredwine1968 at earthlink.net Wed Oct 5 14:11:49 2016 From: bredwine1968 at earthlink.net (Bruce Redwine) Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 14:11:49 -0700 Subject: [ilds] Kipling's Kim v. Forster's Passage In-Reply-To: References: <66DAA229-D4C8-4E01-A977-DA6E61EEFFA4@earthlink.net> <1A1376ED-305B-403F-B284-546A376FFE6D@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <678AC845-2DAE-40EA-A403-CB826AB09A95@earthlink.net> Richard, I think we?re back to discussing Durrell?s notion of ?Truth.? (Which differs from mine.) So we have another kind of ?le cercle referm?.? You?re undoubtedly right that Durrell was chiefly a poet and a storyteller, but I have great trouble when he presents (disguises?) certain works as ?fact? (e.g., Prospero?s Cell or his autobiographical poem, ?Le cercle referm??) and then proceeds to embellish and distort. Was he aware of what he was doing? Dunno. If he was aware, isn?t that the definition of lying? Does it matter? Maybe not to many people but to me it does. In Haag?s City of Memory, Yvette Cohen said (more than less) that Durrell couldn?t be trusted to report accurately. At the Durrell Celebration in Alexandria (2007), Penelope Durrell Hope said her mother called PC ?all lies.? It surely wasn?t ?all lies,? but I think a whole lot of fibbing was going on, presumably in the interest of telling a ?good story.? Yes, if Durrell knew there was no fortress at Kurseong but claimed there was, yes, I would object and wonder just what he was up to. Keats can get ?stout Cortez? wrong in ?Chapman?s Homer,? but no one accuses him of lying. Keats was simply a bad historian. Durrell?s ?errors,? if such, are something else again. Bruce > On Oct 5, 2016, at 12:05 PM, Richard Pine wrote: > > As Thomas Wolfe says, ?You can?t go home again.? > Also, think of "the boy who left home will have to meet the man who returns" > But I continue to argue that Kipling meant more to LD than Forster ever could, because Kipling's 'India' was felt, whereas Forster's 'India', like his 'Alexandria', was intuited. To rely on the latter is perilously close to prioritising theory over that which is theoritised - which is one of the great sins (alright, moral errors) of modern academe. > Yes, Elephant's Back bends the truth - have you forgotten that LD was a) a poet and b) a storyteller? And what man can accurately recall childhood? If LD had written "Boom of the sunset gun / In the old fortress of Kurseong" would you object, because there IS no fortress at Kurseong? > RP > > On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 9:34 PM, Bruce Redwine > wrote: > I don?t disagree that India ?meant? a lot to Durrell. But I think we need to distinguish between the dreamy glow of childhood experiences (? la Wordsworth?s 1799 Prelude) and the deep reflections of a mature man (? la Wordsworth?s ?Intimations Ode?). There?s a reason Durrell never returned to India (or reluctantly returned to Egypt)?I would guess that he didn?t want to disturb or destroy some cherished memories, which, after all, is common to all us. As Thomas Wolfe says, ?You can?t go home again.? E. M. Forster?s India, in my opinion, is closer to the India of mature Durrell, philosophic Durrell. When Durrell talked about the India of his childhood, as in his essay ?From the Elephant?s Back? (1982), his recollections are full of fabrications. That India is, in part at least, a Romantic dream. Take the first lines of ?Le circle referm?,? one of Durrell?s last poems: ?Boom of the sunset gun / In the old fortress at Benares.? That very moving poem, which has the appearance of an autobiographical summation of a life, begins in Benares, India. If I?m not mistaken, Durrell the child was never in Benares. He was dreaming that experience, and we all know how important dreams are to Durrell. > > Bruce > > > > > > >> On Oct 5, 2016, at 9:36 AM, Richard Pine > wrote: >> >> "Yes, Durrell identified with Kipling?s Kim as a model for his boyhood experiences in India. That?s Romanticism on a superficial level?that?s postcard India." >> Absolutely not! If it was a postcard, it was a postcard born inside his head - a veritable smile in his mind's eye. It wasn't at all romantic, with or without a capital 'R' and it wasn't in the slightest superficial. India MEANT something to him at first-hand and it imbued his entire life and life-vision. Read what he wrote about the lamas in his introduction to the (first) biog of Alexandra David-Neel by the Foster couple. >> RP >> >> On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 7:04 PM, Bruce Redwine > wrote: >> Yes, Durrell identified with Kipling?s Kim as a model for his boyhood experiences in India. That?s Romanticism on a superficial level?that?s postcard India. As Rick points out, Kipling also taught Durrell a lot about storytelling?and both are expert storytellers. But I would argue that Forster?s Passage to India provided a more profound model for the Indian ?metaphysics? Durrell later explored in his allegorical fiction. (Forster?s Alexandria and Pharos and Pharillon also fit in here.) This is the India Ravi Nambiar discusses. Consider Forster?s opening to Passage?the Marabar Caves and whatever it is that happens inside them. Durrell uses caves to similar effect in The Dark Labyrinth and the Quintet. Those kinds of mysterious or mystical experiences permeate his work. >> >> Bruce >> >> >> >>> On Oct 4, 2016, at 11:03 PM, Richard Pine > wrote: >>> >>> I think what continued to resonate with LD about "Kim" was the fact that like Kipling LD had been born there and as we know deeply resented 'losing' his Indian childhood; that Kim was, as LD supposed himself to be, Anglo-Irish; and that he had known something of Kim's early years - Walsh in Pied Piper of Lovers has a lot in common with Kim. On the other hand, Forster was a 'travel writer' in India and however much he empathised with Indians, he didn't have that background. See what LD says about Kim, quoted in my book "Mindscape" (readable online on the DLC website - pp. 43-46 and 123-126 especially). >>> RP >>> >>> On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 1:29 AM, Bruce Redwine > wrote: >>> Richard, you?ve mentioned Kipling?s Kim before in this context. I?ll have to reread it in the way you suggest. I must have missed something, but I can imagine what Said probably said. I wonder why Durrell didn?t keep Forster?s Passage to India as a ?bedside book.? It seems equally relevant. Forster, by the way, didn?t like Durrell and his brand of Romanticism and didn?t say nice things about him in private. Durrell, on the other hand, was very gracious towards E. M. >>> >>> Bruce >> >> >>> >>> Rick Schoff on 10/5/2016: >> >> I'm reading "Kim" for the first time as an adult. It's not hard to see the east/west contrast. I imagine LD loved the boisterous and colorful aspects of it (is this part and parcel of the "romanticism" Forster didn't like?). Also, I think, the idea of a "Great Game" as the armature and animator of a story impressed Durrell. I first read the Quartet for its overall lushness and the interactions and thoughts of the characters. But "Palestine" ruled over all the action, gave shape and defined the parameters of the story. In the Quintet it's the Templars and their rumored treasure. In addition to other aspects, I think "Kim" taught Durrell some key lessons about pure story-telling. Sure, "Kim" might be just a boy's adventure book (how it was first presented to me), but both elements are in there: good story-telling and depiction of different world views. >> >> >> On Oct 4, 2016, at 6:29 PM, Bruce Redwine > wrote: >> >>> Richard, you?ve mentioned Kipling?s Kim before in this context. I?ll have to reread it in the way you suggest. I must have missed something, but I can imagine what Said probably said. I wonder why Durrell didn?t keep Forster?s Passage to India as a ?bedside book.? It seems equally relevant. Forster, by the way, didn?t like Durrell and his brand of Romanticism and didn?t say nice things about him in private. Durrell, on the other hand, was very gracious towards E. M. >>> >>> Bruce >>> >>> >>> >>>> On Oct 4, 2016, at 2:29 PM, Richard Pine > wrote: >>>> >>>> To appreciate the east-west tension in LD - and particularly the Quintet - it's helpful to look at Kipling's Kim - which LD called his 'bedside book' - and to look also at the ways western critics have tried to engage with this tension - and then to look at the ways non-western critics like Said and Chaudhuri have read Kim. >>>> RP >>>> >>>> On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 12:19 AM, Bruce Redwine > wrote: >>>> Ravi, >>>> >>>> I like the contrast between Durrell?s Constance and Tennyson?s ?Ulysses?: to yield v. not to yield. I think you?re absolutely right in this. That?s the Indian metaphysics of Durrell?s philosophy, which is very un-Western. As to the rest of the Quintet, it has so many aspects (and defects) that readers will be puzzling over these for years to come. I don?t think, however, that Durrell himself was ever ?happy.? In this regard, he was Odyssean, ?to strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.? What he advocated was not necessarily what he practiced. >>>> >>>> Bruce >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Sep 28, 2016, at 8:14 PM, Ravi Nambiar > wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Bruce >>>>> Thanks for your expert comments. You are hundred percent right. The Quintet may/will get the fate of The Revolt. I don't speak authoritatively at all. I am a humble admirer of Durrell. I just quoted Durrell's own words (so that I can escape) only to show that he had not anticipated a Quartet-type audience for his Quintet ("The book is really written for learned people."); and, in spite of that, he claimed this novel his best. My only contention is that it is too early to write off this novel as a failure. Also, there are some fine parts which our young scholars could/should pursue. Our negative (final) judgement should not, I feel, discourage anyone from going into its by-lanes. For example, I liked the contrast Durrell made to the concept of Victorian heroism with a/the modern heroism: replacing the slogan, "to strive, to seek, to find and not to yield" with the slogan, "to surrender, to yield, to abdicate and receive" (Constance 269). I don't think substituting the heroism of Ulysses with that of a Yogi is any kind of philosophy or a bad philosophy. Yoga is popular now. Durrell's concern was to make his character seek happiness, inner happiness, a kind of"bliss-side up" life (the first half of the novel was the war-ridden world). That is why I called his novel "Eudaemonistic" novel, the type of novel making its theme as a system of ethics that evaluates actions (heroism) in terms of their capacity to produce happiness. The Quintet may be a failure, but, it certainly gives some narrative clues to future writers. We have had enough of realism, surrealism, magic realism, and so on. Why not try metarealism also? >>>>> My apology to all those who disagree with me. Let us agree to disagree for the sake of literature. >>>>> Best >>>>> Ravi >>>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> >>> >>>> On Oct 4, 2016, at 2:29 PM, Richard Pine > wrote: >>>> >>>> To appreciate the east-west tension in LD - and particularly the Quintet - it's helpful to look at Kipling's Kim - which LD called his 'bedside book' - and to look also at the ways western critics have tried to engage with this tension - and then to look at the ways non-western critics like Said and Chaudhuri have read Kim. >>>> RP >>>> >>>> On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 12:19 AM, Bruce Redwine > wrote: >>>> Ravi, >>>> >>>> I like the contrast between Durrell?s Constance and Tennyson?s ?Ulysses?: to yield v. not to yield. I think you?re absolutely right in this. That?s the Indian metaphysics of Durrell?s philosophy, which is very un-Western. As to the rest of the Quintet, it has so many aspects (and defects) that readers will be puzzling over these for years to come. I don?t think, however, that Durrell himself was ever ?happy.? In this regard, he was Odyssean, ?to strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.? What he advocated was not necessarily what he practiced. >>>> >>>> Bruce >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Sep 28, 2016, at 8:14 PM, Ravi Nambiar > wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Bruce >>>>> Thanks for your expert comments. You are hundred percent right. The Quintet may/will get the fate of The Revolt. I don't speak authoritatively at all. I am a humble admirer of Durrell. I just quoted Durrell's own words (so that I can escape) only to show that he had not anticipated a Quartet-type audience for his Quintet ("The book is really written for learned people."); and, in spite of that, he claimed this novel his best. My only contention is that it is too early to write off this novel as a failure. Also, there are some fine parts which our young scholars could/should pursue. Our negative (final) judgement should not, I feel, discourage anyone from going into its by-lanes. For example, I liked the contrast Durrell made to the concept of Victorian heroism with a/the modern heroism: replacing the slogan, "to strive, to seek, to find and not to yield" with the slogan, "to surrender, to yield, to abdicate and receive" (Constance 269). I don't think substituting the heroism of Ulysses with that of a Yogi is any kind of philosophy or a bad philosophy. Yoga is popular now. Durrell's concern was to make his character seek happiness, inner happiness, a kind of"bliss-side up" life (the first half of the novel was the war-ridden world). That is why I called his novel "Eudaemonistic" novel, the type of novel making its theme as a system of ethics that evaluates actions (heroism) in terms of their capacity to produce happiness. The Quintet may be a failure, but, it certainly gives some narrative clues to future writers. We have had enough of realism, surrealism, magic realism, and so on. Why not try metarealism also? >>>>> My apology to all those who disagree with me. Let us agree to disagree for the sake of literature. >>>>> Best >>>>> Ravi >>>>> >>> >> >> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From durrelllibrarycorfu at gmail.com Wed Oct 5 14:12:57 2016 From: durrelllibrarycorfu at gmail.com (Richard Pine) Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2016 00:12:57 +0300 Subject: [ilds] Chang-Durrell Message-ID: The following is the inventory of letters from Jolan Chang to lawrence Durrell held in the LD collection at the Universitye Paris X (Nanterre) RP Letters from *Jolan Chang* (author of *The Tao of Love and Sex*, publ. April 1977): 1976-1982 1) ALS May 15 1976 to L.D. in English. Re: sending his book to Wildwood, printing planned for next spring; A. Nin?s *Diaries*. Asks L.D. for choice of title for his book. 2) ALS April 10 1977 (from Stockholm). Re: his book, just published by Wildwood and related subjects. 3) ALS: n.d. (early 1977, Feb 28, from Stockholm). Re: Gail Sheehy?s best-selling book *Passages: *she is a Durrell admirer and a devotee of the ancient Chinese Tao of Loving (ref. to p.313 of her book, ?The sexual diamond?, copy enclosed). Concludes: ?knowingly or unknowingly, suddenly all the feminists seem to be on the side of the Tao?! Invites L.D. to discussion on the subject in London with his daughter, Needham and Gail Sheehy. (1 leaf) + A self-introduction: photocopy of MS. (1 leaf) + Photo of J.Chang + Xerox of Wildwood?s ad for *The Tao of Love and Sex* with L.D.?s introduction. 4) Photocopy of Ms *An Ancient Chinese Secret of Love and Sex* (2 leaves). 5) Photocopy of Ts interview, points 5 to 10 (2 leaves). 6) ALS: n.d. on letterhead of ?The Royal Swedish Yacht Club? 1977. Re: saving paper (like Needham). Worries about L.D.?s asthma. His book has kept him busy as it is published in 10 countries: ?a success that would surprise women editors at Doubleday?!: so much is due to L.D.?s support and enthusiasm. Re: a TV programme with L.D. and H. Miller. Asks how and where L.D. is going to publish his long essay (*A Smile in the Mind?s Eye*, publ. 1978). (1 leaf) 7) ALS: n.d. on letterhead of the RSYC, Stockholm 1977. Regrets English is still a foreign language to him. Concern about L.D.?s health. Wishes he could live within ?bicycle distance? of L.D. ?Lao Tse did not think that travel is necessary?: no invasions, no wars, no problems. Does not know how to deal with his US publishers. His health is better and better ?drink 4, 5 glasses of water first thing in the morning?). (1 leaf) 8) ALS: July 23, 1978 from Stockholm. J.C. shows his pleasure at success of his book. Invites L.D. to stay with him to work together on the subject of the Tao. ?A presumptuous proposal?, he writes. (1 leaf) + Encloses a letter by E.L. Rossi, a specialist in clinical psychology. (1 leaf) + part of E.L. Rossi?s curriculum vitae. (1 leaf) 9) ALS: Dec.7, 1978 from Stockholm. Re: on travelling, writing and keeping one?s wife! Quotes Danish writer Suzanne Br?gger (a prot?g?e of Miller?s) who said ?devoted writers could seldom keep their lovers because writing is a demanding and possessive mistress?. (1 leaf) 10) ALS: Sept.21, 1982 from Stockholm. Hopes to meet L.D. in Paris. Comes to visit all his publishers in Paris and London. Had a letter from L.D. before his usual tour of Greece. Admits ?a worse letter writer like me is difficult to find?. Does not sound as warm and confident as he used to. (1 leaf) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gammage.kennedy at gmail.com Wed Oct 5 15:21:32 2016 From: gammage.kennedy at gmail.com (Kennedy Gammage) Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 15:21:32 -0700 Subject: [ilds] Jolan Chang In-Reply-To: <87574AD1-441F-400E-BE8E-E1E65118499A@earthlink.net> References: <3C504832-6F3B-421E-B8EC-F9692D6424A1@earthlink.net> <667FBB26-ADBF-4A1A-B0DB-760CA7923FDC@earthlink.net> <8D37B61E-3614-49CB-A65D-25ED42A0E986@earthlink.net> <76559F49-CF11-4951-8814-7EBE4F61F8F9@gmail.com> <63885EC6-B9C3-4BBA-BAA3-30F545F042F7@earthlink.net> <6FAC2367-36A3-4AB9-9DF3-79EE650B40C4@bigpond.net.au> <87574AD1-441F-400E-BE8E-E1E65118499A@earthlink.net> Message-ID: As Bill Murray would say, ?that?s a yes.? Jolan Chang, with all his great sexual advice for the priapic old Durrell, must have influenced the character in Constance. Which is interesting, because the entangled character, who initiated our friends from Monsieur into the gnostic suicide cult of Ophis the Snake at Macabru ? was not in Constance?s circle or apparently interested in curating his precious fluids. Durrell had already created and published the Akkad character before he met Chang. Yes or no? Which may shed some light on the creative process as the Quintet developed. Or not. Thanks very much - Ken On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 3:18 PM, Bruce Redwine wrote: > Good story! And probably good advice for all and sundry. But who follows > it! > > Bruce > > > > On Oct 4, 2016, at 3:12 PM, Denise Tart & David Green < > dtart at bigpond.net.au> wrote: > > According to G Bowker the Chinese Taoist philosopher and sexologist, with > Durrell had been corresponding, visited him in Sommieres at the beginning > of 1976. At the time Larry was living alone in the gloomy old house in one > or two rooms. Chang said Durrell ejaculated too much and drank too much and > needed to stop drinking and only ejaculate occasionally. I wonder how much > Larry paid him for this advice? Certainly he does not seem to have followed > it. > > David. > > Sent from my iPad > > On 5 Oct 2016, at 4:54 AM, Bruce Redwine > wrote: > > Ken, > > Interesting idea, Jolan Chang as ?inspiration? for Affad in *Sebastian.* > Chang appears at beginning of *A Smile in the Mind?s Eye* (1980). *Sebastian > or Ruling Passions* appears in 1983. I first thought Chang was another > of Durrell?s inventions?he seemed too improbable. He was, however, a real > person who wrote *The Tao of Love and Sex: The Ancient Chinese Way to > Ecstasy* (1977). They actually met, as MacNiven verifies. The times are > also right, so maybe there is a connection. I agree?Durrell gets too > explicit with Constance and sex. I?d call his treatment highbrow > pornography. > > Bruce > > > > > . > > On Oct 3, 2016, at 11:44 AM, Kennedy Gammage > wrote: > > Putting this supposition out there for discussion: that Jolan Chang was > the inspiration for Sebastian / Affad in the Quintet ? infamously for all > the annoying tantric sex with-and-in Constance, which I consider somewhat > of a drawback for the central book in the Quintet and a Booker Prize > shortlist. > > Please feel free to disagree - Ken > > > > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marc at marcpiel.fr Wed Oct 5 17:15:21 2016 From: marc at marcpiel.fr (MarcPiel) Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2016 02:15:21 +0200 Subject: [ilds] =?utf-8?q?Fwd=3A_CENTRE_POMPIDOU_-_ART_ET_LIBERT=C3=89_=3A?= =?utf-8?q?_RUPTURE=2C_GUERRE_ET_SURR=C3=89ALISME_EN_=C3=89GYPTE_=281938_-?= =?utf-8?q?1948=29_-_19_OCTOBRE_2016_-_16_JANVIER_2017?= References: Message-ID: <9ADCEBE6-3C41-4782-A840-DAC50B24A0C6@marcpiel.fr> I thought this could interest some if the list! The attachment at the end is a press release. B R Marc Envoy? de mon iPad D?but du message transf?r? : Exp?diteur: PEREIRA Anne-Marie Date: 4 octobre 2016 18:55:23 UTC+2 Objet: CENTRE POMPIDOU - ART ET LIBERT? : RUPTURE, GUERRE ET SURR?ALISME EN ?GYPTE (1938 -1948) - 19 OCTOBRE 2016 - 16 JANVIER 2017 Art et Libert? : Rupture, Guerre et Surr?alisme en ?gypte (1938 ? 1948) est la premi?re exposition consacr?e au groupe Art et Libert? ( jama?at al-fann wa al-hurriyyah), qui a rassembl? autour de Georges Henein une constellation d?artistes et ?crivains r?sidant au Caire dans les ann?es 1930 et 1940. Fond? le 22 d?cembre 1938 ? l?occasion de la publication du manifeste Vive l?art d?g?n?r?, le groupe Art et Libert? a fourni ? une jeune g?n?ration d?artistes, d?intellectuels et d?activistes une plate-forme h?t?rog?ne propice ? de nombreuses r?formes culturelles et politiques. Les membres du groupe ont jou? un r?le actif au sein d?un r?seau international dynamique d?intellectuels et d?artistes li?s ? la mouvance surr?aliste. ? l?aube de la Seconde Guerre mondiale et dans une ?gypte sous domination coloniale britannique, le groupe Art et Libert? s?est inscrit dans un projet culturel et politique international en d?fiant le fascisme, le nationalisme et le colonialisme. Questionnant le surr?alisme, il a tent? de construire un langage litt?raire et pictural contemporain engag? au niveau mondial autant qu?enracin? dans les pr?occupations artistiques et politiques locales. Sur invitation de Catherine David, directrice adjointe du mus?e national d?art moderne en charge de la recherche et de la mondialisation, les commissaires ind?pendants Sam Bardaouil et Till Fellrath / Art Reoriented, ont rassembl? les r?sultats de cinq ann?es de recherches approfondies et de centaines d?entretiens men?s sur le terrain en ?gypte et dans de nombreux autres pays. Vous trouverez ci-joint le dossier de presse de l?exposition. Le vernissage presse aura lieu, sur invitation, le mercredi 19 octobre 2016 de 17h ? 19h 30, Galerie du mus?e et galerie d?art graphique, Mus?e, niveau 4. Je vous remercie de bien vouloir noter cette date, vous recevrez l?invitation ?lectronique dans les prochains jours. Bien ? vous -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 38581 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: DP Art et Liberte-1.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 1404506 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From james.d.gifford at gmail.com Wed Oct 5 17:34:29 2016 From: james.d.gifford at gmail.com (James Gifford) Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 17:34:29 -0700 Subject: [ilds] =?utf-8?q?Fwd=3A_CENTRE_POMPIDOU_-_ART_ET_LIBERT=C3=89_=3A?= =?utf-8?q?_RUPTURE=2C_GUERRE_ET_SURR=C3=89ALISME_EN_=C3=89GYPTE_=281938_-?= =?utf-8?q?1948=29_-_19_OCTOBRE_2016_-_16_JANVIER_2017?= In-Reply-To: <9ADCEBE6-3C41-4782-A840-DAC50B24A0C6@marcpiel.fr> References: <9ADCEBE6-3C41-4782-A840-DAC50B24A0C6@marcpiel.fr> Message-ID: <5774f51c-a826-719d-9dd6-253e9efad866@gmail.com> Very much of interest, Marc! I actually gave a talk on it last week in Toulouse. The curator, Sam Bardaouil, has a book on the topic coming out this month as well. I've pre-ordered a copy and believe it will be excellent: https://www.amazon.ca/Egyptian-Surrealists-Rupture-Modernism-Liberty/dp/1784536512/ I won't see the exhibit until it's in Liverpool at the Tate in 2018 (or maybe earlier in Dresden, if I'm lucky), so please let us know if you see it when it opens in Paris this month. Among those in the Art et Libert? group, Durrell knew Henein and Cossery -- he wrote a tribute to Henein and was responsible for getting the English translations of Cossery's work to America for publication. The group exhibited in Amy Smart's (Amy Nimr's) salon, and she was published in /Personal Landscape/. Durrell is mentioned in the exhibition catalogue. All best, James On 2016-10-05 5:15 PM, MarcPiel wrote: > I thought this could interest some if the list! > The attachment at the end is a press release. > B R > Marc > > Envoy? de mon iPad > > D?but du message transf?r? : > > *Exp?diteur:* PEREIRA Anne-Marie > > *Date:* 4 octobre 2016 18:55:23 UTC+2 > *Objet:* *CENTRE POMPIDOU - ART ET LIBERT? : RUPTURE, GUERRE ET > SURR?ALISME EN ?GYPTE (1938 -1948) - 19 OCTOBRE 2016 - 16 JANVIER 2017* > > > > *Art et Libert? : Rupture, Guerre et Surr?alisme en ?gypte (1938 ? 1948) > est la premi?re exposition consacr?e au groupe Art et Libert? ( /jama?at > al-fann wa al-hurriyyah/),* > > *qui a rassembl? autour de Georges Henein une constellation d?artistes > et ?crivains r?sidant au Caire dans les ann?es 1930 et 1940.* > > * * > > Fond? le 22 d?cembre 1938 ? l?occasion de la publication du manifeste > /Vive l?art d?g?n?r?/, le groupe Art et Libert? a fourni ? une jeune > g?n?ration d?artistes, d?intellectuels et d?activistes > > une plate-forme h?t?rog?ne propice ? de nombreuses r?formes culturelles > et politiques. Les membres du groupe ont jou? un r?le actif au sein d?un > r?seau international dynamique > > d?intellectuels et d?artistes li?s ? la mouvance surr?aliste. ? l?aube > de la Seconde Guerre mondiale et dans une ?gypte sous domination > coloniale britannique, le groupe Art et Libert? > > s?est inscrit dans un projet culturel et politique international en > d?fiant le fascisme, le nationalisme et le colonialisme. Questionnant le > surr?alisme, il a tent? de construire > > un langage litt?raire et pictural contemporain engag? au niveau mondial > autant qu?enracin? dans les pr?occupations artistiques et politiques > locales. > > Sur invitation de Catherine David, directrice adjointe du mus?e national > d?art moderne en charge de la recherche et de la mondialisation, les > commissaires ind?pendants Sam Bardaouil et Till Fellrath / > > Art Reoriented, ont rassembl? les r?sultats de cinq ann?es de recherches > approfondies et de centaines d?entretiens men?s sur le terrain en ?gypte > et dans de nombreux autres pays. > > > > Vous trouverez ci-joint le dossier de presse de l?exposition. > > Le vernissage presse aura lieu, sur invitation, le mercredi 19 octobre > 2016 de 17h ? 19h 30, Galerie du mus?e et galerie d?art graphique, > Mus?e, niveau 4. > > Je vous remercie de bien vouloir noter cette date, vous recevrez > l?invitation ?lectronique dans les prochains jours. > > > > Bien ? vous From cnncravi at gmail.com Wed Oct 5 22:18:25 2016 From: cnncravi at gmail.com (Ravi Nambiar) Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2016 10:48:25 +0530 Subject: [ilds] ILDS Digest, Vol 114, Issue 6 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear R. P and Bruce Even if we admit that what Durrell says cannot be accepted as true, they can be proved right or wrong by going through the materials he left behind. In India, where D was born, I have no access to them. In fact, Isabelle Keller-Privat helped me by sending the copies of some Buddhist texts scored by Durrell, and I will remain indebted to her even beyond my present life. What I am coming to is, according to my finding, it was neither Kipling nor Forster who showed D the real passage to India. I admit Forster was helpful to Durrell in discovering Aalexandria. I quote Durrell: "when I went to Greece: it was to return to India, because I sensed that I'd lost something and I wanted to recover the thread of it. Thus, as soon I was free I began just exactly like a pilgrim: I discovered the ancient philosophers (Pythagoras and company are really Indians!). I experienced a philosophic relief in rediscovering the Indians through the Greeks, because the Greek were poets." So, Durrell had gone beyond Forster, and Kipling (for whom Indians were a "burden"). I think he was able to reach out to the Upanishads, and to Sankara's illusionism (as Anand suspected). I am sure about one thing: D would not have thought of India as a metaphor, if he had not gone to Greece. D is closer to Huxley than Kipling or Forster. Huxley's perennial philosophy has its echo throughout the Quintet. Also, I believe that Campbell's theory of a modern hero, a passively active hero, delighted Durrell. He very deliberately avoided the name of Krishnamoorthy (except to Miller) anywhere in his interviews, but, K is present both in the Quartet and the Quintet. I feel that someone should probe D's relationship with Carlos and Krishnamoorthy. One more quote, please: "So all the Mediterranean are contaminated by Hinduism. I have attempted in my books to use the yeast of religion without breathing the word because we have bypassed it". Regards Ravi On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 5:47 AM, wrote: > 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: Kipling's Kim v. Forster's Passage (Richard Pine) > 2. Blog post on Durrell & Cyprus (James Gifford) > 3. Re: Kipling's Kim v. Forster's Passage (Bruce Redwine) > 4. Chang-Durrell (Richard Pine) > 5. Re: Jolan Chang (Kennedy Gammage) > 6. Fwd: CENTRE POMPIDOU - ART ET LIBERT? : RUPTURE, GUERRE ET > SURR?ALISME EN ?GYPTE (1938 -1948) - 19 OCTOBRE 2016 - 16 JANVIER > 2017 (MarcPiel) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 22:05:48 +0300 > From: Richard Pine > To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca > Subject: Re: [ilds] Kipling's Kim v. Forster's Passage > Message-ID: > gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > As Thomas Wolfe says, ?You can?t go home again.? > Also, think of "the boy who left home will have to meet the man who > returns" > But I continue to argue that Kipling meant more to LD than Forster ever > could, because Kipling's 'India' was felt, whereas Forster's 'India', like > his 'Alexandria', was intuited. To rely on the latter is perilously close > to prioritising theory over that which is theoritised - which is one of the > great sins (alright, moral errors) of modern academe. > Yes, Elephant's Back bends the truth - have you forgotten that LD was a) a > poet and b) a storyteller? And what man can accurately recall childhood? If > LD had written "Boom of the sunset gun / In the old fortress of Kurseong" > would you object, because there IS no fortress at Kurseong? > RP > > On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 9:34 PM, Bruce Redwine > wrote: > > > I don?t disagree that India ?meant? a lot to Durrell. But I think we > need > > to distinguish between the dreamy glow of childhood experiences (? la > > Wordsworth?s 1799 *Prelude*) and the deep reflections of a mature man (? > > la Wordsworth?s ?Intimations Ode?). There?s a reason Durrell never > > returned to India (or reluctantly returned to Egypt)?I would guess that > he > > didn?t want to disturb or destroy some cherished memories, which, after > > all, is common to all us. As Thomas Wolfe says, ?You can?t go home > again.? > > E. M. Forster?s India, in my opinion, is closer to the India of mature > > Durrell, philosophic Durrell. When Durrell talked about the India of his > > childhood, as in his essay ?From the Elephant?s Back? (1982), his > > recollections are full of fabrications. *That* India is, in part at > > least, a Romantic dream. Take the first lines of ?Le circle referm?,? > one > > of Durrell?s last poems: ?Boom of the sunset gun / In the old fortress > at > > Benares.? That very moving poem, which has the appearance of an > > autobiographical summation of a life, begins in Benares, India. If I?m > not > > mistaken, Durrell the child was *never* in Benares. He was dreaming that > > experience, and we all know how important dreams are to Durrell. > > > > Bruce > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Oct 5, 2016, at 9:36 AM, Richard Pine > > wrote: > > > > "Yes, Durrell identified with Kipling?s *Kim* as a model for his boyhood > > experiences in India. That?s Romanticism on a superficial level?that?s > > postcard India." > > Absolutely not! If it was a postcard, it was a postcard born inside his > > head - a veritable smile in his mind's eye. It wasn't at all romantic, > with > > or without a capital 'R' and it wasn't in the slightest superficial. > India > > MEANT something to him at first-hand and it imbued his entire life and > > life-vision. Read what he wrote about the lamas in his introduction to > the > > (first) biog of Alexandra David-Neel by the Foster couple. > > RP > > > > On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 7:04 PM, Bruce Redwine < > bredwine1968 at earthlink.net> > > wrote: > > > >> Yes, Durrell identified with Kipling?s *Kim* as a model for his boyhood > >> experiences in India. That?s Romanticism on a superficial level?that?s > >> postcard India. As Rick points out, Kipling also taught Durrell a lot > >> about storytelling?and both are expert storytellers. But I would argue > >> that Forster?s *Passage to India* provided a more profound model for the > >> Indian ?metaphysics? Durrell later explored in his allegorical fiction. > >> (Forster?s *Alexandria* and *Pharos and Pharillon* also fit in here.) > >> This is the India Ravi Nambiar discusses. Consider Forster?s opening > to > >> *Passage*?the Marabar Caves and whatever it is that happens inside > >> them. Durrell uses caves to similar effect in *The Dark Labyrinth* and > >> the *Quintet*. Those kinds of mysterious or mystical experiences > >> permeate his work. > >> > >> Bruce > >> > >> > >> > >> On Oct 4, 2016, at 11:03 PM, Richard Pine > >> wrote: > >> > >> I think what continued to resonate with LD about "Kim" was the fact that > >> like Kipling LD had been born there and as we know deeply resented > 'losing' > >> his Indian childhood; that Kim was, as LD supposed himself to be, > >> Anglo-Irish; and that he had known something of Kim's early years - > Walsh > >> in Pied Piper of Lovers has a lot in common with Kim. On the other hand, > >> Forster was a 'travel writer' in India and however much he empathised > with > >> Indians, he didn't have that background. See what LD says about Kim, > quoted > >> in my book "Mindscape" (readable online on the DLC website - pp. 43-46 > and > >> 123-126 especially). > >> RP > >> > >> On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 1:29 AM, Bruce Redwine < > bredwine1968 at earthlink.net > >> > wrote: > >> > >>> Richard, you?ve mentioned Kipling?s *Kim* before in this context. I?ll > >>> have to reread it in the way you suggest. I must have missed > something, > >>> but I can imagine what Said probably said. I wonder why Durrell didn?t > >>> keep Forster?s *Passage to India* as a ?bedside book.? It seems > >>> equally relevant. Forster, by the way, didn?t like Durrell and his > brand > >>> of Romanticism and didn?t say nice things about him in private. > Durrell, > >>> on the other hand, was very gracious towards E. M. > >>> > >>> Bruce > >>> > >> > >> > >> > >>> Rick Schoff on 10/5/2016: > >>> > >> > >> I'm reading "Kim" for the first time as an adult. It's not hard to see > >> the east/west contrast. I imagine LD loved the boisterous and colorful > >> aspects of it (is this part and parcel of the "romanticism" Forster > didn't > >> like?). Also, I think, the idea of a "Great Game" as the armature and > >> animator of a story impressed Durrell. I first read the Quartet for its > >> overall lushness and the interactions and thoughts of the characters. > But > >> "Palestine" ruled over all the action, gave shape and defined the > >> parameters of the story. In the Quintet it's the Templars and their > rumored > >> treasure. In addition to other aspects, I think "Kim" taught Durrell > some > >> key lessons about pure story-telling. Sure, "Kim" might be just a boy's > >> adventure book (how it was first presented to me), but both elements > are in > >> there: good story-telling and depiction of different world views. > >> > >> > >> On Oct 4, 2016, at 6:29 PM, Bruce Redwine > >> wrote: > >> > >> Richard, you?ve mentioned Kipling?s *Kim* before in this context. I?ll > >> have to reread it in the way you suggest. I must have missed something, > >> but I can imagine what Said probably said. I wonder why Durrell didn?t > >> keep Forster?s *Passage to India* as a ?bedside book.? It seems equally > >> relevant. Forster, by the way, didn?t like Durrell and his brand of > >> Romanticism and didn?t say nice things about him in private. Durrell, > on > >> the other hand, was very gracious towards E. M. > >> > >> Bruce > >> > >> > >> > >> On Oct 4, 2016, at 2:29 PM, Richard Pine > >> wrote: > >> > >> To appreciate the east-west tension in LD - and particularly the Quintet > >> - it's helpful to look at Kipling's *Kim* - which LD called his 'bedside > >> book' - and to look also at the ways western critics have tried to > engage > >> with this tension - and then to look at the ways non-western critics > like > >> Said and Chaudhuri have read *Kim*. > >> RP > >> > >> On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 12:19 AM, Bruce Redwine >> k.net> wrote: > >> > >>> Ravi, > >>> > >>> I like the contrast between Durrell?s *Constance* and Tennyson?s > >>> ?Ulysses?: to yield v. not to yield. I think you?re absolutely right > in > >>> this. That?s the Indian metaphysics of Durrell?s philosophy, which is > very > >>> un-Western. As to the rest of the *Quintet,* it has so many aspects > >>> (and defects) that readers will be puzzling over these for years to > come. > >>> I don?t think, however, that Durrell himself was ever ?happy.? In this > >>> regard, he was Odyssean, ?to strive, to seek, to find, and not to > yield.? > >>> What he advocated was not necessarily what he practiced. > >>> > >>> Bruce > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> On Sep 28, 2016, at 8:14 PM, Ravi Nambiar wrote: > >>> > >>> Bruce > >>> Thanks for your expert comments. You are hundred percent right.* The > >>> Quintet* may/will get the fate of *The Revolt*. I don't speak > >>> authoritatively at all. I am a humble admirer of Durrell. I just quoted > >>> Durrell's own words (so that I can escape) only to show that he had not > >>> anticipated a Quartet-type audience for his Quintet ("The book is > >>> really written for learned people."); and, in spite of that, he claimed > >>> this novel his best. My only contention is that it is too early to > write > >>> off this novel as a failure. Also, there are some fine parts which our > >>> young scholars could/should pursue. Our negative (final) judgement > should > >>> not, I feel, discourage anyone from going into its by-lanes. For > example, I > >>> liked the contrast Durrell made to the concept of Victorian heroism > with > >>> a/the modern heroism: replacing the slogan, "to strive, to seek, to > find > >>> and not to yield" with the slogan, "to surrender, to yield, to > abdicate and > >>> receive" (*Constance* 269). I don't think substituting the heroism of > >>> Ulysses with that of a Yogi is any kind of philosophy or a bad > philosophy. > >>> Yoga is popular now. Durrell's concern was to make his character seek > >>> happiness, inner happiness, a kind of"bliss-side up" life (the first > half > >>> of the novel was the war-ridden world). That is why I called his novel > >>> "Eudaemonistic" novel, the type of novel making its theme as a system > of > >>> ethics that evaluates actions (heroism) in terms of their capacity to > produce > >>> happiness. The Quintet may be a failure, but, it certainly gives some > >>> narrative clues to future writers. We have had enough of realism, > >>> surrealism, magic realism, and so on. Why not try metarealism also? > >>> My apology to all those who disagree with me. Let us agree to disagree > >>> for the sake of literature. > >>> Best > >>> Ravi > >>> > >>> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> > >> > >>> > >>> On Oct 4, 2016, at 2:29 PM, Richard Pine > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>> To appreciate the east-west tension in LD - and particularly the > Quintet > >>> - it's helpful to look at Kipling's *Kim* - which LD called his > >>> 'bedside book' - and to look also at the ways western critics have > tried to > >>> engage with this tension - and then to look at the ways non-western > critics > >>> like Said and Chaudhuri have read *Kim*. > >>> RP > >>> > >>> On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 12:19 AM, Bruce Redwine < > >>> bredwine1968 at earthlink.net> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Ravi, > >>>> > >>>> I like the contrast between Durrell?s *Constance* and Tennyson?s > >>>> ?Ulysses?: to yield v. not to yield. I think you?re absolutely > right in > >>>> this. That?s the Indian metaphysics of Durrell?s philosophy, which > is very > >>>> un-Western. As to the rest of the *Quintet,* it has so many aspects > >>>> (and defects) that readers will be puzzling over these for years to > come. > >>>> I don?t think, however, that Durrell himself was ever ?happy.? In > this > >>>> regard, he was Odyssean, ?to strive, to seek, to find, and not to > yield.? > >>>> What he advocated was not necessarily what he practiced. > >>>> > >>>> Bruce > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Sep 28, 2016, at 8:14 PM, Ravi Nambiar wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Bruce > >>>> Thanks for your expert comments. You are hundred percent right.* The > >>>> Quintet* may/will get the fate of *The Revolt*. I don't speak > >>>> authoritatively at all. I am a humble admirer of Durrell. I just > quoted > >>>> Durrell's own words (so that I can escape) only to show that he had > not > >>>> anticipated a Quartet-type audience for his Quintet ("The book is > >>>> really written for learned people."); and, in spite of that, he > >>>> claimed this novel his best. My only contention is that it is too > early to > >>>> write off this novel as a failure. Also, there are some fine parts > which > >>>> our young scholars could/should pursue. Our negative (final) judgement > >>>> should not, I feel, discourage anyone from going into its by-lanes. > For > >>>> example, I liked the contrast Durrell made to the concept of Victorian > >>>> heroism with a/the modern heroism: replacing the slogan, "to strive, > to > >>>> seek, to find and not to yield" with the slogan, "to surrender, to > yield, > >>>> to abdicate and receive" (*Constance* 269). I don't think substituting > >>>> the heroism of Ulysses with that of a Yogi is any kind of philosophy > or a > >>>> bad philosophy. Yoga is popular now. Durrell's concern was to make his > >>>> character seek happiness, inner happiness, a kind of"bliss-side up" > life > >>>> (the first half of the novel was the war-ridden world). That is why I > >>>> called his novel "Eudaemonistic" novel, the type of novel making its > theme > >>>> as a system of ethics that evaluates actions (heroism) in terms of > >>>> their capacity to produce happiness. The Quintet may be a failure, > >>>> but, it certainly gives some narrative clues to future writers. We > have had > >>>> enough of realism, surrealism, magic realism, and so on. Why not try > >>>> metarealism also? > >>>> My apology to all those who disagree with me. Let us agree to disagree > >>>> for the sake of literature. > >>>> Best > >>>> Ravi > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> 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 > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > ILDS mailing list > > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: 20161005/d7164b7d/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 15:56:19 -0700 > From: James Gifford > To: ILDS Listserv > Subject: [ilds] Blog post on Durrell & Cyprus > Message-ID: <917b249e-7598-3221-67c0-e25dfdbad178 at gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed > > Dear all, > > Maria Eliades has a new blog on Durrell's time on Cypus, "The Impact of > Expat Writers in Uncertain Times: Lawrence Durrell," which will likely > interest people on the listserv: > > http://blog.pshares.org/index.php/the-impact-of-expat- > writers-in-uncertain-times-lawrence-durrell/ > > The relationship she makes between Durrell's experience and her own in > Istanbul today is striking. > > All best, > James > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 14:11:49 -0700 > From: Bruce Redwine > To: Sumantra Nag > Cc: Bruce Redwine > Subject: Re: [ilds] Kipling's Kim v. Forster's Passage > Message-ID: <678AC845-2DAE-40EA-A403-CB826AB09A95 at earthlink.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > Richard, I think we?re back to discussing Durrell?s notion of ?Truth.? > (Which differs from mine.) So we have another kind of ?le cercle > referm?.? You?re undoubtedly right that Durrell was chiefly a poet and a > storyteller, but I have great trouble when he presents (disguises?) certain > works as ?fact? (e.g., Prospero?s Cell or his autobiographical poem, ?Le > cercle referm??) and then proceeds to embellish and distort. Was he aware > of what he was doing? Dunno. If he was aware, isn?t that the definition > of lying? Does it matter? Maybe not to many people but to me it does. In > Haag?s City of Memory, Yvette Cohen said (more than less) that Durrell > couldn?t be trusted to report accurately. At the Durrell Celebration in > Alexandria (2007), Penelope Durrell Hope said her mother called PC ?all > lies.? It surely wasn?t ?all lies,? but I think a whole lot of fibbing was > going on, presumably in the interest of telling a ?good story.? Yes, if > Durrell knew there was no fortress at ! > Kurseong but claimed there was, yes, I would object and wonder just what > he was up to. Keats can get ?stout Cortez? wrong in ?Chapman?s Homer,? but > no one accuses him of lying. Keats was simply a bad historian. Durrell?s > ?errors,? if such, are something else again. > > Bruce > > > > > > > On Oct 5, 2016, at 12:05 PM, Richard Pine > wrote: > > > > As Thomas Wolfe says, ?You can?t go home again.? > > Also, think of "the boy who left home will have to meet the man who > returns" > > But I continue to argue that Kipling meant more to LD than Forster ever > could, because Kipling's 'India' was felt, whereas Forster's 'India', like > his 'Alexandria', was intuited. To rely on the latter is perilously close > to prioritising theory over that which is theoritised - which is one of the > great sins (alright, moral errors) of modern academe. > > Yes, Elephant's Back bends the truth - have you forgotten that LD was a) > a poet and b) a storyteller? And what man can accurately recall childhood? > If LD had written "Boom of the sunset gun / In the old fortress of > Kurseong" would you object, because there IS no fortress at Kurseong? > > RP > > > > On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 9:34 PM, Bruce Redwine < > bredwine1968 at earthlink.net > wrote: > > I don?t disagree that India ?meant? a lot to Durrell. But I think we > need to distinguish between the dreamy glow of childhood experiences (? la > Wordsworth?s 1799 Prelude) and the deep reflections of a mature man (? la > Wordsworth?s ?Intimations Ode?). There?s a reason Durrell never returned > to India (or reluctantly returned to Egypt)?I would guess that he didn?t > want to disturb or destroy some cherished memories, which, after all, is > common to all us. As Thomas Wolfe says, ?You can?t go home again.? E. M. > Forster?s India, in my opinion, is closer to the India of mature Durrell, > philosophic Durrell. When Durrell talked about the India of his childhood, > as in his essay ?From the Elephant?s Back? (1982), his recollections are > full of fabrications. That India is, in part at least, a Romantic dream. > Take the first lines of ?Le circle referm?,? one of Durrell?s last poems: > ?Boom of the sunset gun / In the old fortress at Benares.? That very > moving poem, which has the app! > earance of an autobiographical summation of a life, begins in Benares, > India. If I?m not mistaken, Durrell the child was never in Benares. He > was dreaming that experience, and we all know how important dreams are to > Durrell. > > > > Bruce > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> On Oct 5, 2016, at 9:36 AM, Richard Pine > wrote: > >> > >> "Yes, Durrell identified with Kipling?s Kim as a model for his boyhood > experiences in India. That?s Romanticism on a superficial level?that?s > postcard India." > >> Absolutely not! If it was a postcard, it was a postcard born inside his > head - a veritable smile in his mind's eye. It wasn't at all romantic, with > or without a capital 'R' and it wasn't in the slightest superficial. India > MEANT something to him at first-hand and it imbued his entire life and > life-vision. Read what he wrote about the lamas in his introduction to the > (first) biog of Alexandra David-Neel by the Foster couple. > >> RP > >> > >> On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 7:04 PM, Bruce Redwine < > bredwine1968 at earthlink.net > wrote: > >> Yes, Durrell identified with Kipling?s Kim as a model for his boyhood > experiences in India. That?s Romanticism on a superficial level?that?s > postcard India. As Rick points out, Kipling also taught Durrell a lot > about storytelling?and both are expert storytellers. But I would argue > that Forster?s Passage to India provided a more profound model for the > Indian ?metaphysics? Durrell later explored in his allegorical fiction. > (Forster?s Alexandria and Pharos and Pharillon also fit in here.) This is > the India Ravi Nambiar discusses. Consider Forster?s opening to > Passage?the Marabar Caves and whatever it is that happens inside them. > Durrell uses caves to similar effect in The Dark Labyrinth and the > Quintet. Those kinds of mysterious or mystical experiences permeate his > work. > >> > >> Bruce > >> > >> > >> > >>> On Oct 4, 2016, at 11:03 PM, Richard Pine > wrote: > >>> > >>> I think what continued to resonate with LD about "Kim" was the fact > that like Kipling LD had been born there and as we know deeply resented > 'losing' his Indian childhood; that Kim was, as LD supposed himself to be, > Anglo-Irish; and that he had known something of Kim's early years - Walsh > in Pied Piper of Lovers has a lot in common with Kim. On the other hand, > Forster was a 'travel writer' in India and however much he empathised with > Indians, he didn't have that background. See what LD says about Kim, quoted > in my book "Mindscape" (readable online on the DLC website - pp. 43-46 and > 123-126 especially). > >>> RP > >>> > >>> On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 1:29 AM, Bruce Redwine < > bredwine1968 at earthlink.net > wrote: > >>> Richard, you?ve mentioned Kipling?s Kim before in this context. I?ll > have to reread it in the way you suggest. I must have missed something, > but I can imagine what Said probably said. I wonder why Durrell didn?t > keep Forster?s Passage to India as a ?bedside book.? It seems equally > relevant. Forster, by the way, didn?t like Durrell and his brand of > Romanticism and didn?t say nice things about him in private. Durrell, on > the other hand, was very gracious towards E. M. > >>> > >>> Bruce > >> > >> > >>> > >>> Rick Schoff on 10/5/2016: > >> > >> I'm reading "Kim" for the first time as an adult. It's not hard to see > the east/west contrast. I imagine LD loved the boisterous and colorful > aspects of it (is this part and parcel of the "romanticism" Forster didn't > like?). Also, I think, the idea of a "Great Game" as the armature and > animator of a story impressed Durrell. I first read the Quartet for its > overall lushness and the interactions and thoughts of the characters. But > "Palestine" ruled over all the action, gave shape and defined the > parameters of the story. In the Quintet it's the Templars and their rumored > treasure. In addition to other aspects, I think "Kim" taught Durrell some > key lessons about pure story-telling. Sure, "Kim" might be just a boy's > adventure book (how it was first presented to me), but both elements are in > there: good story-telling and depiction of different world views. > >> > >> > >> On Oct 4, 2016, at 6:29 PM, Bruce Redwine > wrote: > >> > >>> Richard, you?ve mentioned Kipling?s Kim before in this context. I?ll > have to reread it in the way you suggest. I must have missed something, > but I can imagine what Said probably said. I wonder why Durrell didn?t > keep Forster?s Passage to India as a ?bedside book.? It seems equally > relevant. Forster, by the way, didn?t like Durrell and his brand of > Romanticism and didn?t say nice things about him in private. Durrell, on > the other hand, was very gracious towards E. M. > >>> > >>> Bruce > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>> On Oct 4, 2016, at 2:29 PM, Richard Pine > wrote: > >>>> > >>>> To appreciate the east-west tension in LD - and particularly the > Quintet - it's helpful to look at Kipling's Kim - which LD called his > 'bedside book' - and to look also at the ways western critics have tried to > engage with this tension - and then to look at the ways non-western critics > like Said and Chaudhuri have read Kim. > >>>> RP > >>>> > >>>> On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 12:19 AM, Bruce Redwine < > bredwine1968 at earthlink.net > wrote: > >>>> Ravi, > >>>> > >>>> I like the contrast between Durrell?s Constance and Tennyson?s > ?Ulysses?: to yield v. not to yield. I think you?re absolutely right in > this. That?s the Indian metaphysics of Durrell?s philosophy, which is very > un-Western. As to the rest of the Quintet, it has so many aspects (and > defects) that readers will be puzzling over these for years to come. I > don?t think, however, that Durrell himself was ever ?happy.? In this > regard, he was Odyssean, ?to strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.? > What he advocated was not necessarily what he practiced. > >>>> > >>>> Bruce > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> On Sep 28, 2016, at 8:14 PM, Ravi Nambiar > wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> Bruce > >>>>> Thanks for your expert comments. You are hundred percent right. The > Quintet may/will get the fate of The Revolt. I don't speak authoritatively > at all. I am a humble admirer of Durrell. I just quoted Durrell's own words > (so that I can escape) only to show that he had not anticipated a > Quartet-type audience for his Quintet ("The book is really written for > learned people."); and, in spite of that, he claimed this novel his best. > My only contention is that it is too early to write off this novel as a > failure. Also, there are some fine parts which our young scholars > could/should pursue. Our negative (final) judgement should not, I feel, > discourage anyone from going into its by-lanes. For example, I liked the > contrast Durrell made to the concept of Victorian heroism with a/the modern > heroism: replacing the slogan, "to strive, to seek, to find and not to > yield" with the slogan, "to surrender, to yield, to abdicate and receive" > (Constance 269). I don't think substituting the ! > heroism of Ulysses with that of a Yogi is any kind of philosophy or a bad > philosophy. Yoga is popular now. Durrell's concern was to make his > character seek happiness, inner happiness, a kind of"bliss-side up" life > (the first half of the novel was the war-ridden world). That is why I > called his novel "Eudaemonistic" novel, the type of novel making its theme > as a system of ethics that evaluates actions (heroism) in terms of their > capacity to produce happiness. The Quintet may be a failure, but, it > certainly gives some narrative clues to future writers. We have had enough > of realism, surrealism, magic realism, and so on. Why not try metarealism > also? > >>>>> My apology to all those who disagree with me. Let us agree to > disagree for the sake of literature. > >>>>> Best > >>>>> Ravi > >>>>> > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> > >>> > >>>> On Oct 4, 2016, at 2:29 PM, Richard Pine > wrote: > >>>> > >>>> To appreciate the east-west tension in LD - and particularly the > Quintet - it's helpful to look at Kipling's Kim - which LD called his > 'bedside book' - and to look also at the ways western critics have tried to > engage with this tension - and then to look at the ways non-western critics > like Said and Chaudhuri have read Kim. > >>>> RP > >>>> > >>>> On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 12:19 AM, Bruce Redwine < > bredwine1968 at earthlink.net > wrote: > >>>> Ravi, > >>>> > >>>> I like the contrast between Durrell?s Constance and Tennyson?s > ?Ulysses?: to yield v. not to yield. I think you?re absolutely right in > this. That?s the Indian metaphysics of Durrell?s philosophy, which is very > un-Western. As to the rest of the Quintet, it has so many aspects (and > defects) that readers will be puzzling over these for years to come. I > don?t think, however, that Durrell himself was ever ?happy.? In this > regard, he was Odyssean, ?to strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.? > What he advocated was not necessarily what he practiced. > >>>> > >>>> Bruce > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> On Sep 28, 2016, at 8:14 PM, Ravi Nambiar > wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> Bruce > >>>>> Thanks for your expert comments. You are hundred percent right. The > Quintet may/will get the fate of The Revolt. I don't speak authoritatively > at all. I am a humble admirer of Durrell. I just quoted Durrell's own words > (so that I can escape) only to show that he had not anticipated a > Quartet-type audience for his Quintet ("The book is really written for > learned people."); and, in spite of that, he claimed this novel his best. > My only contention is that it is too early to write off this novel as a > failure. Also, there are some fine parts which our young scholars > could/should pursue. Our negative (final) judgement should not, I feel, > discourage anyone from going into its by-lanes. For example, I liked the > contrast Durrell made to the concept of Victorian heroism with a/the modern > heroism: replacing the slogan, "to strive, to seek, to find and not to > yield" with the slogan, "to surrender, to yield, to abdicate and receive" > (Constance 269). I don't think substituting the ! > heroism of Ulysses with that of a Yogi is any kind of philosophy or a bad > philosophy. Yoga is popular now. Durrell's concern was to make his > character seek happiness, inner happiness, a kind of"bliss-side up" life > (the first half of the novel was the war-ridden world). That is why I > called his novel "Eudaemonistic" novel, the type of novel making its theme > as a system of ethics that evaluates actions (heroism) in terms of their > capacity to produce happiness. The Quintet may be a failure, but, it > certainly gives some narrative clues to future writers. We have had enough > of realism, surrealism, magic realism, and so on. Why not try metarealism > also? > >>>>> My apology to all those who disagree with me. Let us agree to > disagree for the sake of literature. > >>>>> Best > >>>>> Ravi > >>>>> > >>> > >> > >> > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: 20161005/e36a34c7/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2016 00:12:57 +0300 > From: Richard Pine > To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca, Sumantra Nag , Denise > Tart , Kennedy Gammage > > Subject: [ilds] Chang-Durrell > Message-ID: > mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > The following is the inventory of letters from Jolan Chang to lawrence > Durrell held in the LD collection at the Universitye Paris X (Nanterre) > > RP > > > Letters from *Jolan Chang* (author of *The Tao of Love and Sex*, publ. > April 1977): 1976-1982 > > 1) ALS May 15 1976 to L.D. in English. Re: sending his book to > Wildwood, printing planned for next spring; A. Nin?s *Diaries*. Asks L.D. > for choice of title for his book. > > 2) ALS April 10 1977 (from Stockholm). Re: his book, just published by > Wildwood and related subjects. > > 3) ALS: n.d. (early 1977, Feb 28, from Stockholm). Re: Gail Sheehy?s > best-selling book *Passages: *she is a Durrell admirer and a devotee of the > ancient Chinese Tao of Loving (ref. to p.313 of her book, ?The sexual > diamond?, copy enclosed). Concludes: ?knowingly or unknowingly, suddenly > all the feminists seem to be on the side of the Tao?! Invites L.D. to > discussion on the subject in London with his daughter, Needham and Gail > Sheehy. (1 leaf) > > + A self-introduction: photocopy of MS. (1 leaf) > > + Photo of J.Chang > > + Xerox of Wildwood?s ad for *The Tao of Love and Sex* with L.D.?s > introduction. > > 4) Photocopy of Ms *An Ancient Chinese Secret of Love and Sex* (2 > leaves). > > 5) Photocopy of Ts interview, points 5 to 10 (2 leaves). > > 6) ALS: n.d. on letterhead of ?The Royal Swedish Yacht Club? 1977. Re: > saving paper (like Needham). Worries about L.D.?s asthma. His book has kept > him busy as it is published in 10 countries: ?a success that would surprise > women editors at Doubleday?!: so much is due to L.D.?s support and > enthusiasm. Re: a TV programme with L.D. and H. Miller. Asks how and where > L.D. is going to publish his long essay (*A Smile in the Mind?s Eye*, publ. > 1978). (1 leaf) > > 7) ALS: n.d. on letterhead of the RSYC, Stockholm 1977. Regrets > English is still a foreign language to him. Concern about L.D.?s health. > Wishes he could live within ?bicycle distance? of L.D. ?Lao Tse did not > think that travel is necessary?: no invasions, no wars, no problems. Does > not know how to deal with his US publishers. His health is better and > better ?drink 4, 5 glasses of water first thing in the morning?). (1 leaf) > > 8) ALS: July 23, 1978 from Stockholm. J.C. shows his pleasure at > success of his book. Invites L.D. to stay with him to work together on the > subject of the Tao. ?A presumptuous proposal?, he writes. (1 leaf) > > + Encloses a letter by E.L. Rossi, a specialist in clinical psychology. (1 > leaf) > > + part of E.L. Rossi?s curriculum vitae. (1 leaf) > > 9) ALS: Dec.7, 1978 from Stockholm. Re: on travelling, writing and > keeping one?s wife! Quotes Danish writer Suzanne Br?gger (a prot?g?e of > Miller?s) who said ?devoted writers could seldom keep their lovers because > writing is a demanding and possessive mistress?. (1 leaf) > > 10) ALS: Sept.21, 1982 from Stockholm. Hopes to meet L.D. in Paris. Comes > to visit all his publishers in Paris and London. Had a letter from L.D. > before his usual tour of Greece. Admits ?a worse letter writer like me is > difficult to find?. Does not sound as warm and confident as he used to. (1 > leaf) > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: 20161006/4e9e49a7/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 15:21:32 -0700 > From: Kennedy Gammage > To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca > Subject: Re: [ilds] Jolan Chang > Message-ID: > mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > As Bill Murray would say, ?that?s a yes.? Jolan Chang, with all his great > sexual advice for the priapic old Durrell, must have influenced the > character in Constance. > > Which is interesting, because the entangled character, who > initiated our friends from Monsieur into the gnostic suicide cult of Ophis > the Snake at Macabru ? was not in Constance?s circle or apparently > interested in curating his precious fluids. Durrell had already created and > published the Akkad character before he met Chang. Yes or no? > > Which may shed some light on the creative process as the Quintet developed. > Or not. > > Thanks very much - Ken > > > On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 3:18 PM, Bruce Redwine > wrote: > > > Good story! And probably good advice for all and sundry. But who > follows > > it! > > > > Bruce > > > > > > > > On Oct 4, 2016, at 3:12 PM, Denise Tart & David Green < > > dtart at bigpond.net.au> wrote: > > > > According to G Bowker the Chinese Taoist philosopher and sexologist, with > > Durrell had been corresponding, visited him in Sommieres at the beginning > > of 1976. At the time Larry was living alone in the gloomy old house in > one > > or two rooms. Chang said Durrell ejaculated too much and drank too much > and > > needed to stop drinking and only ejaculate occasionally. I wonder how > much > > Larry paid him for this advice? Certainly he does not seem to have > followed > > it. > > > > David. > > > > Sent from my iPad > > > > On 5 Oct 2016, at 4:54 AM, Bruce Redwine > > wrote: > > > > Ken, > > > > Interesting idea, Jolan Chang as ?inspiration? for Affad in *Sebastian.* > > Chang appears at beginning of *A Smile in the Mind?s Eye* (1980). > *Sebastian > > or Ruling Passions* appears in 1983. I first thought Chang was another > > of Durrell?s inventions?he seemed too improbable. He was, however, a > real > > person who wrote *The Tao of Love and Sex: The Ancient Chinese Way to > > Ecstasy* (1977). They actually met, as MacNiven verifies. The times are > > also right, so maybe there is a connection. I agree?Durrell gets too > > explicit with Constance and sex. I?d call his treatment highbrow > > pornography. > > > > Bruce > > > > > > > > > > . > > > > On Oct 3, 2016, at 11:44 AM, Kennedy Gammage > > wrote: > > > > Putting this supposition out there for discussion: that Jolan Chang was > > the inspiration for Sebastian / Affad in the Quintet ? infamously for all > > the annoying tantric sex with-and-in Constance, which I consider somewhat > > of a drawback for the central book in the Quintet and a Booker Prize > > shortlist. > > > > Please feel free to disagree - Ken > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > ILDS mailing list > > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: 20161005/44049654/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2016 02:15:21 +0200 > From: MarcPiel > To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca > Subject: [ilds] Fwd: CENTRE POMPIDOU - ART ET LIBERT? : RUPTURE, > GUERRE ET SURR?ALISME EN ?GYPTE (1938 -1948) - 19 OCTOBRE 2016 - 16 > JANVIER 2017 > Message-ID: <9ADCEBE6-3C41-4782-A840-DAC50B24A0C6 at marcpiel.fr> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > I thought this could interest some if the list! > The attachment at the end is a press release. > B R > Marc > > Envoy? de mon iPad > > D?but du message transf?r? : > > Exp?diteur: PEREIRA Anne-Marie > Date: 4 octobre 2016 18:55:23 UTC+2 > Objet: CENTRE POMPIDOU - ART ET LIBERT? : RUPTURE, GUERRE ET SURR?ALISME > EN ?GYPTE (1938 -1948) - 19 OCTOBRE 2016 - 16 JANVIER 2017 > > > Art et Libert? : Rupture, Guerre et Surr?alisme en ?gypte (1938 ? 1948) > est la premi?re exposition consacr?e au groupe Art et Libert? ( jama?at > al-fann wa al-hurriyyah), > qui a rassembl? autour de Georges Henein une constellation d?artistes et > ?crivains r?sidant au Caire dans les ann?es 1930 et 1940. > > Fond? le 22 d?cembre 1938 ? l?occasion de la publication du manifeste Vive > l?art d?g?n?r?, le groupe Art et Libert? a fourni ? une jeune g?n?ration > d?artistes, d?intellectuels et d?activistes > une plate-forme h?t?rog?ne propice ? de nombreuses r?formes culturelles et > politiques. Les membres du groupe ont jou? un r?le actif au sein d?un > r?seau international dynamique > d?intellectuels et d?artistes li?s ? la mouvance surr?aliste. ? l?aube de > la Seconde Guerre mondiale et dans une ?gypte sous domination coloniale > britannique, le groupe Art et Libert? > s?est inscrit dans un projet culturel et politique international en > d?fiant le fascisme, le nationalisme et le colonialisme. Questionnant le > surr?alisme, il a tent? de construire > un langage litt?raire et pictural contemporain engag? au niveau mondial > autant qu?enracin? dans les pr?occupations artistiques et politiques > locales. > Sur invitation de Catherine David, directrice adjointe du mus?e national > d?art moderne en charge de la recherche et de la mondialisation, les > commissaires ind?pendants Sam Bardaouil et Till Fellrath / > Art Reoriented, ont rassembl? les r?sultats de cinq ann?es de recherches > approfondies et de centaines d?entretiens men?s sur le terrain en ?gypte et > dans de nombreux autres pays. > > Vous trouverez ci-joint le dossier de presse de l?exposition. > Le vernissage presse aura lieu, sur invitation, le mercredi 19 octobre > 2016 de 17h ? 19h 30, Galerie du mus?e et galerie d?art graphique, Mus?e, > niveau 4. > Je vous remercie de bien vouloir noter cette date, vous recevrez > l?invitation ?lectronique dans les prochains jours. > > Bien ? vous > > > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: 20161006/c9bbc1fd/attachment.html> > -------------- next part -------------- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: image001.jpg > Type: image/jpeg > Size: 38581 bytes > Desc: not available > URL: 20161006/c9bbc1fd/attachment.jpg> > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: 20161006/c9bbc1fd/attachment-0001.html> > -------------- next part -------------- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: DP Art et Liberte-1.pdf > Type: application/pdf > Size: 1404506 bytes > Desc: not available > URL: 20161006/c9bbc1fd/attachment.pdf> > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: 20161006/c9bbc1fd/attachment-0002.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Subject: Digest Footer > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > > ------------------------------ > > End of ILDS Digest, Vol 114, Issue 6 > ************************************ > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pinedurrellcorfu at gmail.com Thu Oct 6 00:16:10 2016 From: pinedurrellcorfu at gmail.com (Richard Pine) Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2016 10:16:10 +0300 Subject: [ilds] Kipling's Kim v. Forster's Passage In-Reply-To: <678AC845-2DAE-40EA-A403-CB826AB09A95@earthlink.net> References: <66DAA229-D4C8-4E01-A977-DA6E61EEFFA4@earthlink.net> <1A1376ED-305B-403F-B284-546A376FFE6D@earthlink.net> <678AC845-2DAE-40EA-A403-CB826AB09A95@earthlink.net> Message-ID: I have reached the point in life, in lying, in reading and writing when "truth" has ceased to matter. Electing Trump (if it happens) will be a lie, but it will also be a verifiable fact - i.e truth. Every day every one of us tells lies, but they are societal lies, as in "Hello how are you?" "Fine thanks. And you?" "Great". Not "Not so good, my wife just ran off with my best friend and my son was jailed for selling cocaine". We obscure, fudge, conceal, obfuscate so as to present an image.The best possible image that society wants to see. The best possible story that the reader wants to read. If I decline a dinner invitation on the grounds of too much work, when in 'truth' I just don't want to spend an evening with that person and their guests, am I telling a lie? And if so, a white lie, a black lie or a grey lie? And so what? It was a necessary lie in order to protect myself against boredom. LD was in his personal life (if there was such a thing) a man incapable - like all of us - of telling the truth. He was in search of himself and he would tell any lies necessary, and push aside all unnecessary truths, to get at that self. You say that PC may not be 'all lies' - so which bits are not lies? And which bits that are 'truthful' are really truthful, or just partially truthful? C'mon. How can any truth-oriented person read MFOA, knowing that it is one monstrous lie but a damn good story? A principled reader will refuse to read it. And the Bible. And the Sermon on the Mount (both Jesus's and Caradoc's, although Caradoc's was more truthful) I share the LD view - that it just doesn't matter. And why do you call 'Le cercle referme' an 'autobiographical poem'? What 'proof' have you that it was intended as such? No, mere readerly, critical supposition. If I said that, in calling it that, you were lying, you would, rightly, take offence. Keats? He was a POET! but you excuse him because he was 'a bad historian' - i.e., he can't be blamed because he didn't tell a lie, just he didn't get the truth that historians would insist on. But if Durrell makes the same mistake, deliberately, he is, apparently, to blame. A liar. Oh dear, you must be a very virtuous person Bruce. And virtue is.....virtual truth, not real truth. ha ha RP On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 12:11 AM, Bruce Redwine wrote: > Richard, I think we?re back to discussing Durrell?s notion of ?Truth.? > (Which differs from mine.) So we have another kind of ?le cercle > referm?.? You?re undoubtedly right that Durrell was chiefly a poet and a > storyteller, but I have great trouble when he presents (disguises?) certain > works as ?fact? (e.g., *Prospero?s Cell* or his autobiographical poem, > ?Le cercle referm??) and then proceeds to embellish and distort. Was he > aware of what he was doing? Dunno. If he was aware, isn?t that the > definition of lying? Does it matter? Maybe not to many people but to me > it does. In Haag?s *City of Memory,* Yvette Cohen said (more than less) > that Durrell couldn?t be trusted to report accurately. At the Durrell > Celebration in Alexandria (2007), Penelope Durrell Hope said her mother > called *PC* ?all lies.? It surely wasn?t ?all lies,? but I think a whole > lot of fibbing was going on, presumably in the interest of telling a ?good > story.? Yes, if Durrell knew there was no fortress at Kurseong but claimed > there was, yes, I would object and wonder just what he was up to. Keats > can get ?stout Cortez? wrong in ?Chapman?s Homer,? but no one accuses him > of lying. Keats was simply a bad historian. Durrell?s ?errors,? if such, > are something else again. > > Bruce > > > > > > > On Oct 5, 2016, at 12:05 PM, Richard Pine > wrote: > > As Thomas Wolfe says, ?You can?t go home again.? > Also, think of "the boy who left home will have to meet the man who > returns" > But I continue to argue that Kipling meant more to LD than Forster ever > could, because Kipling's 'India' was felt, whereas Forster's 'India', like > his 'Alexandria', was intuited. To rely on the latter is perilously close > to prioritising theory over that which is theoritised - which is one of the > great sins (alright, moral errors) of modern academe. > Yes, Elephant's Back bends the truth - have you forgotten that LD was a) a > poet and b) a storyteller? And what man can accurately recall childhood? If > LD had written "Boom of the sunset gun / In the old fortress of Kurseong" > would you object, because there IS no fortress at Kurseong? > RP > > On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 9:34 PM, Bruce Redwine > wrote: > >> I don?t disagree that India ?meant? a lot to Durrell. But I think we >> need to distinguish between the dreamy glow of childhood experiences (? la >> Wordsworth?s 1799 *Prelude*) and the deep reflections of a mature man (? >> la Wordsworth?s ?Intimations Ode?). There?s a reason Durrell never >> returned to India (or reluctantly returned to Egypt)?I would guess that he >> didn?t want to disturb or destroy some cherished memories, which, after >> all, is common to all us. As Thomas Wolfe says, ?You can?t go home again.? >> E. M. Forster?s India, in my opinion, is closer to the India of mature >> Durrell, philosophic Durrell. When Durrell talked about the India of his >> childhood, as in his essay ?From the Elephant?s Back? (1982), his >> recollections are full of fabrications. *That* India is, in part at >> least, a Romantic dream. Take the first lines of ?Le circle referm?,? one >> of Durrell?s last poems: ?Boom of the sunset gun / In the old fortress at >> Benares.? That very moving poem, which has the appearance of an >> autobiographical summation of a life, begins in Benares, India. If I?m not >> mistaken, Durrell the child was *never* in Benares. He was dreaming >> that experience, and we all know how important dreams are to Durrell. >> >> Bruce >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Oct 5, 2016, at 9:36 AM, Richard Pine >> wrote: >> >> "Yes, Durrell identified with Kipling?s *Kim* as a model for his boyhood >> experiences in India. That?s Romanticism on a superficial level?that?s >> postcard India." >> Absolutely not! If it was a postcard, it was a postcard born inside his >> head - a veritable smile in his mind's eye. It wasn't at all romantic, with >> or without a capital 'R' and it wasn't in the slightest superficial. India >> MEANT something to him at first-hand and it imbued his entire life and >> life-vision. Read what he wrote about the lamas in his introduction to the >> (first) biog of Alexandra David-Neel by the Foster couple. >> RP >> >> On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 7:04 PM, Bruce Redwine > > wrote: >> >>> Yes, Durrell identified with Kipling?s *Kim* as a model for his boyhood >>> experiences in India. That?s Romanticism on a superficial level?that?s >>> postcard India. As Rick points out, Kipling also taught Durrell a lot >>> about storytelling?and both are expert storytellers. But I would argue >>> that Forster?s *Passage to India* provided a more profound model for >>> the Indian ?metaphysics? Durrell later explored in his allegorical fiction. >>> (Forster?s *Alexandria* and *Pharos and Pharillon* also fit in here.) >>> This is the India Ravi Nambiar discusses. Consider Forster?s opening to >>> *Passage*?the Marabar Caves and whatever it is that happens inside >>> them. Durrell uses caves to similar effect in *The Dark Labyrinth* and >>> the *Quintet*. Those kinds of mysterious or mystical experiences >>> permeate his work. >>> >>> Bruce >>> >>> >>> >>> On Oct 4, 2016, at 11:03 PM, Richard Pine >>> wrote: >>> >>> I think what continued to resonate with LD about "Kim" was the fact that >>> like Kipling LD had been born there and as we know deeply resented 'losing' >>> his Indian childhood; that Kim was, as LD supposed himself to be, >>> Anglo-Irish; and that he had known something of Kim's early years - Walsh >>> in Pied Piper of Lovers has a lot in common with Kim. On the other hand, >>> Forster was a 'travel writer' in India and however much he empathised with >>> Indians, he didn't have that background. See what LD says about Kim, quoted >>> in my book "Mindscape" (readable online on the DLC website - pp. 43-46 and >>> 123-126 especially). >>> RP >>> >>> On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 1:29 AM, Bruce Redwine < >>> bredwine1968 at earthlink.net> wrote: >>> >>>> Richard, you?ve mentioned Kipling?s *Kim* before in this context. >>>> I?ll have to reread it in the way you suggest. I must have missed >>>> something, but I can imagine what Said probably said. I wonder why Durrell >>>> didn?t keep Forster?s *Passage to India* as a ?bedside book.? It >>>> seems equally relevant. Forster, by the way, didn?t like Durrell and his >>>> brand of Romanticism and didn?t say nice things about him in private. >>>> Durrell, on the other hand, was very gracious towards E. M. >>>> >>>> Bruce >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> Rick Schoff on 10/5/2016: >>>> >>> >>> I'm reading "Kim" for the first time as an adult. It's not hard to see >>> the east/west contrast. I imagine LD loved the boisterous and colorful >>> aspects of it (is this part and parcel of the "romanticism" Forster didn't >>> like?). Also, I think, the idea of a "Great Game" as the armature and >>> animator of a story impressed Durrell. I first read the Quartet for its >>> overall lushness and the interactions and thoughts of the characters. But >>> "Palestine" ruled over all the action, gave shape and defined the >>> parameters of the story. In the Quintet it's the Templars and their rumored >>> treasure. In addition to other aspects, I think "Kim" taught Durrell some >>> key lessons about pure story-telling. Sure, "Kim" might be just a boy's >>> adventure book (how it was first presented to me), but both elements are in >>> there: good story-telling and depiction of different world views. >>> >>> >>> On Oct 4, 2016, at 6:29 PM, Bruce Redwine >>> wrote: >>> >>> Richard, you?ve mentioned Kipling?s *Kim* before in this context. I?ll >>> have to reread it in the way you suggest. I must have missed something, >>> but I can imagine what Said probably said. I wonder why Durrell didn?t >>> keep Forster?s *Passage to India* as a ?bedside book.? It seems >>> equally relevant. Forster, by the way, didn?t like Durrell and his brand >>> of Romanticism and didn?t say nice things about him in private. Durrell, >>> on the other hand, was very gracious towards E. M. >>> >>> Bruce >>> >>> >>> >>> On Oct 4, 2016, at 2:29 PM, Richard Pine >>> wrote: >>> >>> To appreciate the east-west tension in LD - and particularly the Quintet >>> - it's helpful to look at Kipling's *Kim* - which LD called his >>> 'bedside book' - and to look also at the ways western critics have tried to >>> engage with this tension - and then to look at the ways non-western critics >>> like Said and Chaudhuri have read *Kim*. >>> RP >>> >>> On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 12:19 AM, Bruce Redwine >> k.net> wrote: >>> >>>> Ravi, >>>> >>>> I like the contrast between Durrell?s *Constance* and Tennyson?s >>>> ?Ulysses?: to yield v. not to yield. I think you?re absolutely right in >>>> this. That?s the Indian metaphysics of Durrell?s philosophy, which is very >>>> un-Western. As to the rest of the *Quintet,* it has so many aspects >>>> (and defects) that readers will be puzzling over these for years to come. >>>> I don?t think, however, that Durrell himself was ever ?happy.? In this >>>> regard, he was Odyssean, ?to strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.? >>>> What he advocated was not necessarily what he practiced. >>>> >>>> Bruce >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sep 28, 2016, at 8:14 PM, Ravi Nambiar wrote: >>>> >>>> Bruce >>>> Thanks for your expert comments. You are hundred percent right.* The >>>> Quintet* may/will get the fate of *The Revolt*. I don't speak >>>> authoritatively at all. I am a humble admirer of Durrell. I just quoted >>>> Durrell's own words (so that I can escape) only to show that he had not >>>> anticipated a Quartet-type audience for his Quintet ("The book is >>>> really written for learned people."); and, in spite of that, he >>>> claimed this novel his best. My only contention is that it is too early to >>>> write off this novel as a failure. Also, there are some fine parts which >>>> our young scholars could/should pursue. Our negative (final) judgement >>>> should not, I feel, discourage anyone from going into its by-lanes. For >>>> example, I liked the contrast Durrell made to the concept of Victorian >>>> heroism with a/the modern heroism: replacing the slogan, "to strive, to >>>> seek, to find and not to yield" with the slogan, "to surrender, to yield, >>>> to abdicate and receive" (*Constance* 269). I don't think substituting >>>> the heroism of Ulysses with that of a Yogi is any kind of philosophy or a >>>> bad philosophy. Yoga is popular now. Durrell's concern was to make his >>>> character seek happiness, inner happiness, a kind of"bliss-side up" life >>>> (the first half of the novel was the war-ridden world). That is why I >>>> called his novel "Eudaemonistic" novel, the type of novel making its theme >>>> as a system of ethics that evaluates actions (heroism) in terms of >>>> their capacity to produce happiness. The Quintet may be a failure, >>>> but, it certainly gives some narrative clues to future writers. We have had >>>> enough of realism, surrealism, magic realism, and so on. Why not try >>>> metarealism also? >>>> My apology to all those who disagree with me. Let us agree to disagree >>>> for the sake of literature. >>>> Best >>>> Ravi >>>> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> >>> >>>> >>>> On Oct 4, 2016, at 2:29 PM, Richard Pine >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> To appreciate the east-west tension in LD - and particularly the >>>> Quintet - it's helpful to look at Kipling's *Kim* - which LD called >>>> his 'bedside book' - and to look also at the ways western critics have >>>> tried to engage with this tension - and then to look at the ways >>>> non-western critics like Said and Chaudhuri have read *Kim*. >>>> RP >>>> >>>> On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 12:19 AM, Bruce Redwine < >>>> bredwine1968 at earthlink.net> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Ravi, >>>>> >>>>> I like the contrast between Durrell?s *Constance* and Tennyson?s >>>>> ?Ulysses?: to yield v. not to yield. I think you?re absolutely right in >>>>> this. That?s the Indian metaphysics of Durrell?s philosophy, which is very >>>>> un-Western. As to the rest of the *Quintet,* it has so many aspects >>>>> (and defects) that readers will be puzzling over these for years to come. >>>>> I don?t think, however, that Durrell himself was ever ?happy.? In this >>>>> regard, he was Odyssean, ?to strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.? >>>>> What he advocated was not necessarily what he practiced. >>>>> >>>>> Bruce >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Sep 28, 2016, at 8:14 PM, Ravi Nambiar wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Bruce >>>>> Thanks for your expert comments. You are hundred percent right.* The >>>>> Quintet* may/will get the fate of *The Revolt*. I don't speak >>>>> authoritatively at all. I am a humble admirer of Durrell. I just quoted >>>>> Durrell's own words (so that I can escape) only to show that he had not >>>>> anticipated a Quartet-type audience for his Quintet ("The book is >>>>> really written for learned people."); and, in spite of that, he >>>>> claimed this novel his best. My only contention is that it is too early to >>>>> write off this novel as a failure. Also, there are some fine parts which >>>>> our young scholars could/should pursue. Our negative (final) judgement >>>>> should not, I feel, discourage anyone from going into its by-lanes. For >>>>> example, I liked the contrast Durrell made to the concept of Victorian >>>>> heroism with a/the modern heroism: replacing the slogan, "to strive, to >>>>> seek, to find and not to yield" with the slogan, "to surrender, to yield, >>>>> to abdicate and receive" (*Constance* 269). I don't think >>>>> substituting the heroism of Ulysses with that of a Yogi is any kind of >>>>> philosophy or a bad philosophy. Yoga is popular now. Durrell's concern was >>>>> to make his character seek happiness, inner happiness, a kind of"bliss-side >>>>> up" life (the first half of the novel was the war-ridden world). That is >>>>> why I called his novel "Eudaemonistic" novel, the type of novel making its >>>>> theme as a system of ethics that evaluates actions (heroism) in terms >>>>> of their capacity to produce happiness. The Quintet may be a failure, >>>>> but, it certainly gives some narrative clues to future writers. We have had >>>>> enough of realism, surrealism, magic realism, and so on. Why not try >>>>> metarealism also? >>>>> My apology to all those who disagree with me. Let us agree to disagree >>>>> for the sake of literature. >>>>> Best >>>>> Ravi >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pinedurrellcorfu at gmail.com Thu Oct 6 01:29:19 2016 From: pinedurrellcorfu at gmail.com (Richard Pine) Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2016 11:29:19 +0300 Subject: [ilds] ILDS Digest, Vol 114, Issue 6 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I don't think any westerner will be able to appreciate the Quintet as fully as an adept (I choose the word deliberately) of the eastern philosophies. We may appreciate his intentions, but not the texts themselves. I do not think LD was steeped in the literature of Buddhism (which I think, judging by his library, was his main interest) but he had acquired enough superficial understanding to know how to bend it to his purpose - the 'Tibetan novel' - and thus to puzzle those of us who are adepts (if we are!) of the narrative tradition. LD was not the only writer to believe that Pythagoras etc and the Greek philosophers generally, were of eastern origin in their cosmologies - there is a strong argument, for just one example, that Irish traditional music has more than superficial affinities with musical traditions from Egypt which are demonstrably of oriental origin. But that is something which most people in the western world are incapable of discussing with any intelligence. All one can hope to do is to observe and, if suitable, interpolate, but not to dissect or pontificate. I am happy to be hidebound by my (inevitably) western education - LD always hankered after the education he might have had if his childhood had led him otherwhere than it did. And he DID want to revisit India - when his friend Ray Mills worked in Sikkim for the WHO, there was a possibility of a British Council tour there for LD, but it came to nothing - my sources for this are a letter to me from LD and a conversation in Corfu with Ray Mills - but then, they may have been telling me a monstrous lie, n'est pas? RP On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 8:18 AM, Ravi Nambiar wrote: > Dear R. P and Bruce > Even if we admit that what Durrell says cannot be accepted as true, they > can be proved right or wrong by going through the materials he left behind. > In India, where D was born, I have no access to them. In fact, Isabelle > Keller-Privat helped me by sending the copies of some Buddhist texts scored > by Durrell, and I will remain indebted to her even beyond my present life. > What I am coming to is, according to my finding, it was neither Kipling nor > Forster who showed D the real passage to India. I admit Forster was helpful > to Durrell in discovering Aalexandria. I quote Durrell: "when I went to > Greece: it was to return to India, because I sensed that I'd lost something > and I wanted to recover the thread of it. Thus, as soon I was free I began > just exactly like a pilgrim: I discovered the ancient philosophers > (Pythagoras and company are really Indians!). I experienced a philosophic > relief in rediscovering the Indians through the Greeks, because the Greek > were poets." So, Durrell had gone beyond Forster, and Kipling (for whom > Indians were a "burden"). I think he was able to reach out to the > Upanishads, and to Sankara's illusionism (as Anand suspected). I am sure > about one thing: D would not have thought of India as a metaphor, if he had > not gone to Greece. D is closer to Huxley than Kipling or Forster. Huxley's > perennial philosophy has its echo throughout the Quintet. Also, I believe > that Campbell's theory of a modern hero, a passively active hero, delighted > Durrell. He very deliberately avoided the name of Krishnamoorthy (except to > Miller) anywhere in his interviews, but, K is present both in the Quartet > and the Quintet. I feel that someone should probe D's relationship with > Carlos and Krishnamoorthy. > One more quote, please: "So all the Mediterranean are contaminated by > Hinduism. I have attempted in my books to use the yeast of religion without > breathing the word because we have bypassed it". > Regards > Ravi > > On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 5:47 AM, wrote: > >> 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: Kipling's Kim v. Forster's Passage (Richard Pine) >> 2. Blog post on Durrell & Cyprus (James Gifford) >> 3. Re: Kipling's Kim v. Forster's Passage (Bruce Redwine) >> 4. Chang-Durrell (Richard Pine) >> 5. Re: Jolan Chang (Kennedy Gammage) >> 6. Fwd: CENTRE POMPIDOU - ART ET LIBERT? : RUPTURE, GUERRE ET >> SURR?ALISME EN ?GYPTE (1938 -1948) - 19 OCTOBRE 2016 - 16 JANVIER >> 2017 (MarcPiel) >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Message: 1 >> Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 22:05:48 +0300 >> From: Richard Pine >> To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca >> Subject: Re: [ilds] Kipling's Kim v. Forster's Passage >> Message-ID: >> > ail.com> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" >> >> As Thomas Wolfe says, ?You can?t go home again.? >> Also, think of "the boy who left home will have to meet the man who >> returns" >> But I continue to argue that Kipling meant more to LD than Forster ever >> could, because Kipling's 'India' was felt, whereas Forster's 'India', like >> his 'Alexandria', was intuited. To rely on the latter is perilously close >> to prioritising theory over that which is theoritised - which is one of >> the >> great sins (alright, moral errors) of modern academe. >> Yes, Elephant's Back bends the truth - have you forgotten that LD was a) a >> poet and b) a storyteller? And what man can accurately recall childhood? >> If >> LD had written "Boom of the sunset gun / In the old fortress of Kurseong" >> would you object, because there IS no fortress at Kurseong? >> RP >> >> On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 9:34 PM, Bruce Redwine > > >> wrote: >> >> > I don?t disagree that India ?meant? a lot to Durrell. But I think we >> need >> > to distinguish between the dreamy glow of childhood experiences (? la >> > Wordsworth?s 1799 *Prelude*) and the deep reflections of a mature man (? >> > la Wordsworth?s ?Intimations Ode?). There?s a reason Durrell never >> > returned to India (or reluctantly returned to Egypt)?I would guess that >> he >> > didn?t want to disturb or destroy some cherished memories, which, after >> > all, is common to all us. As Thomas Wolfe says, ?You can?t go home >> again.? >> > E. M. Forster?s India, in my opinion, is closer to the India of mature >> > Durrell, philosophic Durrell. When Durrell talked about the India of >> his >> > childhood, as in his essay ?From the Elephant?s Back? (1982), his >> > recollections are full of fabrications. *That* India is, in part at >> > least, a Romantic dream. Take the first lines of ?Le circle referm?,? >> one >> > of Durrell?s last poems: ?Boom of the sunset gun / In the old fortress >> at >> > Benares.? That very moving poem, which has the appearance of an >> > autobiographical summation of a life, begins in Benares, India. If I?m >> not >> > mistaken, Durrell the child was *never* in Benares. He was dreaming >> that >> > experience, and we all know how important dreams are to Durrell. >> > >> > Bruce >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > On Oct 5, 2016, at 9:36 AM, Richard Pine >> > wrote: >> > >> > "Yes, Durrell identified with Kipling?s *Kim* as a model for his boyhood >> > experiences in India. That?s Romanticism on a superficial level?that?s >> > postcard India." >> > Absolutely not! If it was a postcard, it was a postcard born inside his >> > head - a veritable smile in his mind's eye. It wasn't at all romantic, >> with >> > or without a capital 'R' and it wasn't in the slightest superficial. >> India >> > MEANT something to him at first-hand and it imbued his entire life and >> > life-vision. Read what he wrote about the lamas in his introduction to >> the >> > (first) biog of Alexandra David-Neel by the Foster couple. >> > RP >> > >> > On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 7:04 PM, Bruce Redwine < >> bredwine1968 at earthlink.net> >> > wrote: >> > >> >> Yes, Durrell identified with Kipling?s *Kim* as a model for his boyhood >> >> experiences in India. That?s Romanticism on a superficial level?that?s >> >> postcard India. As Rick points out, Kipling also taught Durrell a lot >> >> about storytelling?and both are expert storytellers. But I would argue >> >> that Forster?s *Passage to India* provided a more profound model for >> the >> >> Indian ?metaphysics? Durrell later explored in his allegorical fiction. >> >> (Forster?s *Alexandria* and *Pharos and Pharillon* also fit in here.) >> >> This is the India Ravi Nambiar discusses. Consider Forster?s opening >> to >> >> *Passage*?the Marabar Caves and whatever it is that happens inside >> >> them. Durrell uses caves to similar effect in *The Dark Labyrinth* and >> >> the *Quintet*. Those kinds of mysterious or mystical experiences >> >> permeate his work. >> >> >> >> Bruce >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Oct 4, 2016, at 11:03 PM, Richard Pine >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> I think what continued to resonate with LD about "Kim" was the fact >> that >> >> like Kipling LD had been born there and as we know deeply resented >> 'losing' >> >> his Indian childhood; that Kim was, as LD supposed himself to be, >> >> Anglo-Irish; and that he had known something of Kim's early years - >> Walsh >> >> in Pied Piper of Lovers has a lot in common with Kim. On the other >> hand, >> >> Forster was a 'travel writer' in India and however much he empathised >> with >> >> Indians, he didn't have that background. See what LD says about Kim, >> quoted >> >> in my book "Mindscape" (readable online on the DLC website - pp. 43-46 >> and >> >> 123-126 especially). >> >> RP >> >> >> >> On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 1:29 AM, Bruce Redwine < >> bredwine1968 at earthlink.net >> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >>> Richard, you?ve mentioned Kipling?s *Kim* before in this context. >> I?ll >> >>> have to reread it in the way you suggest. I must have missed >> something, >> >>> but I can imagine what Said probably said. I wonder why Durrell >> didn?t >> >>> keep Forster?s *Passage to India* as a ?bedside book.? It seems >> >>> equally relevant. Forster, by the way, didn?t like Durrell and his >> brand >> >>> of Romanticism and didn?t say nice things about him in private. >> Durrell, >> >>> on the other hand, was very gracious towards E. M. >> >>> >> >>> Bruce >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> Rick Schoff on 10/5/2016: >> >>> >> >> >> >> I'm reading "Kim" for the first time as an adult. It's not hard to see >> >> the east/west contrast. I imagine LD loved the boisterous and colorful >> >> aspects of it (is this part and parcel of the "romanticism" Forster >> didn't >> >> like?). Also, I think, the idea of a "Great Game" as the armature and >> >> animator of a story impressed Durrell. I first read the Quartet for its >> >> overall lushness and the interactions and thoughts of the characters. >> But >> >> "Palestine" ruled over all the action, gave shape and defined the >> >> parameters of the story. In the Quintet it's the Templars and their >> rumored >> >> treasure. In addition to other aspects, I think "Kim" taught Durrell >> some >> >> key lessons about pure story-telling. Sure, "Kim" might be just a boy's >> >> adventure book (how it was first presented to me), but both elements >> are in >> >> there: good story-telling and depiction of different world views. >> >> >> >> >> >> On Oct 4, 2016, at 6:29 PM, Bruce Redwine >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> Richard, you?ve mentioned Kipling?s *Kim* before in this context. I?ll >> >> have to reread it in the way you suggest. I must have missed >> something, >> >> but I can imagine what Said probably said. I wonder why Durrell didn?t >> >> keep Forster?s *Passage to India* as a ?bedside book.? It seems >> equally >> >> relevant. Forster, by the way, didn?t like Durrell and his brand of >> >> Romanticism and didn?t say nice things about him in private. Durrell, >> on >> >> the other hand, was very gracious towards E. M. >> >> >> >> Bruce >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Oct 4, 2016, at 2:29 PM, Richard Pine >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> To appreciate the east-west tension in LD - and particularly the >> Quintet >> >> - it's helpful to look at Kipling's *Kim* - which LD called his >> 'bedside >> >> book' - and to look also at the ways western critics have tried to >> engage >> >> with this tension - and then to look at the ways non-western critics >> like >> >> Said and Chaudhuri have read *Kim*. >> >> RP >> >> >> >> On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 12:19 AM, Bruce Redwine > >> k.net> wrote: >> >> >> >>> Ravi, >> >>> >> >>> I like the contrast between Durrell?s *Constance* and Tennyson?s >> >>> ?Ulysses?: to yield v. not to yield. I think you?re absolutely >> right in >> >>> this. That?s the Indian metaphysics of Durrell?s philosophy, which >> is very >> >>> un-Western. As to the rest of the *Quintet,* it has so many aspects >> >>> (and defects) that readers will be puzzling over these for years to >> come. >> >>> I don?t think, however, that Durrell himself was ever ?happy.? In >> this >> >>> regard, he was Odyssean, ?to strive, to seek, to find, and not to >> yield.? >> >>> What he advocated was not necessarily what he practiced. >> >>> >> >>> Bruce >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> On Sep 28, 2016, at 8:14 PM, Ravi Nambiar wrote: >> >>> >> >>> Bruce >> >>> Thanks for your expert comments. You are hundred percent right.* The >> >>> Quintet* may/will get the fate of *The Revolt*. I don't speak >> >>> authoritatively at all. I am a humble admirer of Durrell. I just >> quoted >> >>> Durrell's own words (so that I can escape) only to show that he had >> not >> >>> anticipated a Quartet-type audience for his Quintet ("The book is >> >>> really written for learned people."); and, in spite of that, he >> claimed >> >>> this novel his best. My only contention is that it is too early to >> write >> >>> off this novel as a failure. Also, there are some fine parts which our >> >>> young scholars could/should pursue. Our negative (final) judgement >> should >> >>> not, I feel, discourage anyone from going into its by-lanes. For >> example, I >> >>> liked the contrast Durrell made to the concept of Victorian heroism >> with >> >>> a/the modern heroism: replacing the slogan, "to strive, to seek, to >> find >> >>> and not to yield" with the slogan, "to surrender, to yield, to >> abdicate and >> >>> receive" (*Constance* 269). I don't think substituting the heroism of >> >>> Ulysses with that of a Yogi is any kind of philosophy or a bad >> philosophy. >> >>> Yoga is popular now. Durrell's concern was to make his character seek >> >>> happiness, inner happiness, a kind of"bliss-side up" life (the first >> half >> >>> of the novel was the war-ridden world). That is why I called his novel >> >>> "Eudaemonistic" novel, the type of novel making its theme as a system >> of >> >>> ethics that evaluates actions (heroism) in terms of their capacity >> to produce >> >>> happiness. The Quintet may be a failure, but, it certainly gives some >> >>> narrative clues to future writers. We have had enough of realism, >> >>> surrealism, magic realism, and so on. Why not try metarealism also? >> >>> My apology to all those who disagree with me. Let us agree to disagree >> >>> for the sake of literature. >> >>> Best >> >>> Ravi >> >>> >> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >>> On Oct 4, 2016, at 2:29 PM, Richard Pine >> >>> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> To appreciate the east-west tension in LD - and particularly the >> Quintet >> >>> - it's helpful to look at Kipling's *Kim* - which LD called his >> >>> 'bedside book' - and to look also at the ways western critics have >> tried to >> >>> engage with this tension - and then to look at the ways non-western >> critics >> >>> like Said and Chaudhuri have read *Kim*. >> >>> RP >> >>> >> >>> On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 12:19 AM, Bruce Redwine < >> >>> bredwine1968 at earthlink.net> wrote: >> >>> >> >>>> Ravi, >> >>>> >> >>>> I like the contrast between Durrell?s *Constance* and Tennyson?s >> >>>> ?Ulysses?: to yield v. not to yield. I think you?re absolutely >> right in >> >>>> this. That?s the Indian metaphysics of Durrell?s philosophy, which >> is very >> >>>> un-Western. As to the rest of the *Quintet,* it has so many aspects >> >>>> (and defects) that readers will be puzzling over these for years to >> come. >> >>>> I don?t think, however, that Durrell himself was ever ?happy.? In >> this >> >>>> regard, he was Odyssean, ?to strive, to seek, to find, and not to >> yield.? >> >>>> What he advocated was not necessarily what he practiced. >> >>>> >> >>>> Bruce >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> On Sep 28, 2016, at 8:14 PM, Ravi Nambiar >> wrote: >> >>>> >> >>>> Bruce >> >>>> Thanks for your expert comments. You are hundred percent right.* The >> >>>> Quintet* may/will get the fate of *The Revolt*. I don't speak >> >>>> authoritatively at all. I am a humble admirer of Durrell. I just >> quoted >> >>>> Durrell's own words (so that I can escape) only to show that he had >> not >> >>>> anticipated a Quartet-type audience for his Quintet ("The book is >> >>>> really written for learned people."); and, in spite of that, he >> >>>> claimed this novel his best. My only contention is that it is too >> early to >> >>>> write off this novel as a failure. Also, there are some fine parts >> which >> >>>> our young scholars could/should pursue. Our negative (final) >> judgement >> >>>> should not, I feel, discourage anyone from going into its by-lanes. >> For >> >>>> example, I liked the contrast Durrell made to the concept of >> Victorian >> >>>> heroism with a/the modern heroism: replacing the slogan, "to strive, >> to >> >>>> seek, to find and not to yield" with the slogan, "to surrender, to >> yield, >> >>>> to abdicate and receive" (*Constance* 269). I don't think >> substituting >> >>>> the heroism of Ulysses with that of a Yogi is any kind of >> philosophy or a >> >>>> bad philosophy. Yoga is popular now. Durrell's concern was to make >> his >> >>>> character seek happiness, inner happiness, a kind of"bliss-side up" >> life >> >>>> (the first half of the novel was the war-ridden world). That is why I >> >>>> called his novel "Eudaemonistic" novel, the type of novel making its >> theme >> >>>> as a system of ethics that evaluates actions (heroism) in terms of >> >>>> their capacity to produce happiness. The Quintet may be a failure, >> >>>> but, it certainly gives some narrative clues to future writers. We >> have had >> >>>> enough of realism, surrealism, magic realism, and so on. Why not try >> >>>> metarealism also? >> >>>> My apology to all those who disagree with me. Let us agree to >> disagree >> >>>> for the sake of literature. >> >>>> Best >> >>>> Ravi >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> 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 >> > >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > ILDS mailing list >> > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca >> > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds >> > >> > >> -------------- next part -------------- >> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >> URL: > d7164b7d/attachment-0001.html> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 2 >> Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 15:56:19 -0700 >> From: James Gifford >> To: ILDS Listserv >> Subject: [ilds] Blog post on Durrell & Cyprus >> Message-ID: <917b249e-7598-3221-67c0-e25dfdbad178 at gmail.com> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed >> >> Dear all, >> >> Maria Eliades has a new blog on Durrell's time on Cypus, "The Impact of >> Expat Writers in Uncertain Times: Lawrence Durrell," which will likely >> interest people on the listserv: >> >> http://blog.pshares.org/index.php/the-impact-of-expat-writer >> s-in-uncertain-times-lawrence-durrell/ >> >> The relationship she makes between Durrell's experience and her own in >> Istanbul today is striking. >> >> All best, >> James >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 3 >> Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 14:11:49 -0700 >> From: Bruce Redwine >> To: Sumantra Nag >> Cc: Bruce Redwine >> Subject: Re: [ilds] Kipling's Kim v. Forster's Passage >> Message-ID: <678AC845-2DAE-40EA-A403-CB826AB09A95 at earthlink.net> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" >> >> Richard, I think we?re back to discussing Durrell?s notion of ?Truth.? >> (Which differs from mine.) So we have another kind of ?le cercle >> referm?.? You?re undoubtedly right that Durrell was chiefly a poet and a >> storyteller, but I have great trouble when he presents (disguises?) certain >> works as ?fact? (e.g., Prospero?s Cell or his autobiographical poem, ?Le >> cercle referm??) and then proceeds to embellish and distort. Was he aware >> of what he was doing? Dunno. If he was aware, isn?t that the definition >> of lying? Does it matter? Maybe not to many people but to me it does. In >> Haag?s City of Memory, Yvette Cohen said (more than less) that Durrell >> couldn?t be trusted to report accurately. At the Durrell Celebration in >> Alexandria (2007), Penelope Durrell Hope said her mother called PC ?all >> lies.? It surely wasn?t ?all lies,? but I think a whole lot of fibbing was >> going on, presumably in the interest of telling a ?good story.? Yes, if >> Durrell knew there was no fortress at ! >> Kurseong but claimed there was, yes, I would object and wonder just what >> he was up to. Keats can get ?stout Cortez? wrong in ?Chapman?s Homer,? but >> no one accuses him of lying. Keats was simply a bad historian. Durrell?s >> ?errors,? if such, are something else again. >> >> Bruce >> >> >> >> >> >> > On Oct 5, 2016, at 12:05 PM, Richard Pine >> wrote: >> > >> > As Thomas Wolfe says, ?You can?t go home again.? >> > Also, think of "the boy who left home will have to meet the man who >> returns" >> > But I continue to argue that Kipling meant more to LD than Forster ever >> could, because Kipling's 'India' was felt, whereas Forster's 'India', like >> his 'Alexandria', was intuited. To rely on the latter is perilously close >> to prioritising theory over that which is theoritised - which is one of the >> great sins (alright, moral errors) of modern academe. >> > Yes, Elephant's Back bends the truth - have you forgotten that LD was >> a) a poet and b) a storyteller? And what man can accurately recall >> childhood? If LD had written "Boom of the sunset gun / In the old fortress >> of Kurseong" would you object, because there IS no fortress at Kurseong? >> > RP >> > >> > On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 9:34 PM, Bruce Redwine < >> bredwine1968 at earthlink.net > wrote: >> > I don?t disagree that India ?meant? a lot to Durrell. But I think we >> need to distinguish between the dreamy glow of childhood experiences (? la >> Wordsworth?s 1799 Prelude) and the deep reflections of a mature man (? la >> Wordsworth?s ?Intimations Ode?). There?s a reason Durrell never returned >> to India (or reluctantly returned to Egypt)?I would guess that he didn?t >> want to disturb or destroy some cherished memories, which, after all, is >> common to all us. As Thomas Wolfe says, ?You can?t go home again.? E. M. >> Forster?s India, in my opinion, is closer to the India of mature Durrell, >> philosophic Durrell. When Durrell talked about the India of his childhood, >> as in his essay ?From the Elephant?s Back? (1982), his recollections are >> full of fabrications. That India is, in part at least, a Romantic dream. >> Take the first lines of ?Le circle referm?,? one of Durrell?s last poems: >> ?Boom of the sunset gun / In the old fortress at Benares.? That very >> moving poem, which has the app! >> earance of an autobiographical summation of a life, begins in Benares, >> India. If I?m not mistaken, Durrell the child was never in Benares. He >> was dreaming that experience, and we all know how important dreams are to >> Durrell. >> > >> > Bruce >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >> On Oct 5, 2016, at 9:36 AM, Richard Pine > > wrote: >> >> >> >> "Yes, Durrell identified with Kipling?s Kim as a model for his boyhood >> experiences in India. That?s Romanticism on a superficial level?that?s >> postcard India." >> >> Absolutely not! If it was a postcard, it was a postcard born inside >> his head - a veritable smile in his mind's eye. It wasn't at all romantic, >> with or without a capital 'R' and it wasn't in the slightest superficial. >> India MEANT something to him at first-hand and it imbued his entire life >> and life-vision. Read what he wrote about the lamas in his introduction to >> the (first) biog of Alexandra David-Neel by the Foster couple. >> >> RP >> >> >> >> On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 7:04 PM, Bruce Redwine < >> bredwine1968 at earthlink.net > wrote: >> >> Yes, Durrell identified with Kipling?s Kim as a model for his boyhood >> experiences in India. That?s Romanticism on a superficial level?that?s >> postcard India. As Rick points out, Kipling also taught Durrell a lot >> about storytelling?and both are expert storytellers. But I would argue >> that Forster?s Passage to India provided a more profound model for the >> Indian ?metaphysics? Durrell later explored in his allegorical fiction. >> (Forster?s Alexandria and Pharos and Pharillon also fit in here.) This is >> the India Ravi Nambiar discusses. Consider Forster?s opening to >> Passage?the Marabar Caves and whatever it is that happens inside them. >> Durrell uses caves to similar effect in The Dark Labyrinth and the >> Quintet. Those kinds of mysterious or mystical experiences permeate his >> work. >> >> >> >> Bruce >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> On Oct 4, 2016, at 11:03 PM, Richard Pine > > wrote: >> >>> >> >>> I think what continued to resonate with LD about "Kim" was the fact >> that like Kipling LD had been born there and as we know deeply resented >> 'losing' his Indian childhood; that Kim was, as LD supposed himself to be, >> Anglo-Irish; and that he had known something of Kim's early years - Walsh >> in Pied Piper of Lovers has a lot in common with Kim. On the other hand, >> Forster was a 'travel writer' in India and however much he empathised with >> Indians, he didn't have that background. See what LD says about Kim, quoted >> in my book "Mindscape" (readable online on the DLC website - pp. 43-46 and >> 123-126 especially). >> >>> RP >> >>> >> >>> On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 1:29 AM, Bruce Redwine < >> bredwine1968 at earthlink.net > wrote: >> >>> Richard, you?ve mentioned Kipling?s Kim before in this context. I?ll >> have to reread it in the way you suggest. I must have missed something, >> but I can imagine what Said probably said. I wonder why Durrell didn?t >> keep Forster?s Passage to India as a ?bedside book.? It seems equally >> relevant. Forster, by the way, didn?t like Durrell and his brand of >> Romanticism and didn?t say nice things about him in private. Durrell, on >> the other hand, was very gracious towards E. M. >> >>> >> >>> Bruce >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >>> Rick Schoff on 10/5/2016: >> >> >> >> I'm reading "Kim" for the first time as an adult. It's not hard to see >> the east/west contrast. I imagine LD loved the boisterous and colorful >> aspects of it (is this part and parcel of the "romanticism" Forster didn't >> like?). Also, I think, the idea of a "Great Game" as the armature and >> animator of a story impressed Durrell. I first read the Quartet for its >> overall lushness and the interactions and thoughts of the characters. But >> "Palestine" ruled over all the action, gave shape and defined the >> parameters of the story. In the Quintet it's the Templars and their rumored >> treasure. In addition to other aspects, I think "Kim" taught Durrell some >> key lessons about pure story-telling. Sure, "Kim" might be just a boy's >> adventure book (how it was first presented to me), but both elements are in >> there: good story-telling and depiction of different world views. >> >> >> >> >> >> On Oct 4, 2016, at 6:29 PM, Bruce Redwine > > wrote: >> >> >> >>> Richard, you?ve mentioned Kipling?s Kim before in this context. I?ll >> have to reread it in the way you suggest. I must have missed something, >> but I can imagine what Said probably said. I wonder why Durrell didn?t >> keep Forster?s Passage to India as a ?bedside book.? It seems equally >> relevant. Forster, by the way, didn?t like Durrell and his brand of >> Romanticism and didn?t say nice things about him in private. Durrell, on >> the other hand, was very gracious towards E. M. >> >>> >> >>> Bruce >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>>> On Oct 4, 2016, at 2:29 PM, Richard Pine > > wrote: >> >>>> >> >>>> To appreciate the east-west tension in LD - and particularly the >> Quintet - it's helpful to look at Kipling's Kim - which LD called his >> 'bedside book' - and to look also at the ways western critics have tried to >> engage with this tension - and then to look at the ways non-western critics >> like Said and Chaudhuri have read Kim. >> >>>> RP >> >>>> >> >>>> On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 12:19 AM, Bruce Redwine < >> bredwine1968 at earthlink.net > wrote: >> >>>> Ravi, >> >>>> >> >>>> I like the contrast between Durrell?s Constance and Tennyson?s >> ?Ulysses?: to yield v. not to yield. I think you?re absolutely right in >> this. That?s the Indian metaphysics of Durrell?s philosophy, which is very >> un-Western. As to the rest of the Quintet, it has so many aspects (and >> defects) that readers will be puzzling over these for years to come. I >> don?t think, however, that Durrell himself was ever ?happy.? In this >> regard, he was Odyssean, ?to strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.? >> What he advocated was not necessarily what he practiced. >> >>>> >> >>>> Bruce >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>>> On Sep 28, 2016, at 8:14 PM, Ravi Nambiar > > wrote: >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Bruce >> >>>>> Thanks for your expert comments. You are hundred percent right. The >> Quintet may/will get the fate of The Revolt. I don't speak authoritatively >> at all. I am a humble admirer of Durrell. I just quoted Durrell's own words >> (so that I can escape) only to show that he had not anticipated a >> Quartet-type audience for his Quintet ("The book is really written for >> learned people."); and, in spite of that, he claimed this novel his best. >> My only contention is that it is too early to write off this novel as a >> failure. Also, there are some fine parts which our young scholars >> could/should pursue. Our negative (final) judgement should not, I feel, >> discourage anyone from going into its by-lanes. For example, I liked the >> contrast Durrell made to the concept of Victorian heroism with a/the modern >> heroism: replacing the slogan, "to strive, to seek, to find and not to >> yield" with the slogan, "to surrender, to yield, to abdicate and receive" >> (Constance 269). I don't think substituting the ! >> heroism of Ulysses with that of a Yogi is any kind of philosophy or a >> bad philosophy. Yoga is popular now. Durrell's concern was to make his >> character seek happiness, inner happiness, a kind of"bliss-side up" life >> (the first half of the novel was the war-ridden world). That is why I >> called his novel "Eudaemonistic" novel, the type of novel making its theme >> as a system of ethics that evaluates actions (heroism) in terms of their >> capacity to produce happiness. The Quintet may be a failure, but, it >> certainly gives some narrative clues to future writers. We have had enough >> of realism, surrealism, magic realism, and so on. Why not try metarealism >> also? >> >>>>> My apology to all those who disagree with me. Let us agree to >> disagree for the sake of literature. >> >>>>> Best >> >>>>> Ravi >> >>>>> >> >>> >> >>> _______________________________________________ >> >>> >> >>> >> >>>> On Oct 4, 2016, at 2:29 PM, Richard Pine > > wrote: >> >>>> >> >>>> To appreciate the east-west tension in LD - and particularly the >> Quintet - it's helpful to look at Kipling's Kim - which LD called his >> 'bedside book' - and to look also at the ways western critics have tried to >> engage with this tension - and then to look at the ways non-western critics >> like Said and Chaudhuri have read Kim. >> >>>> RP >> >>>> >> >>>> On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 12:19 AM, Bruce Redwine < >> bredwine1968 at earthlink.net > wrote: >> >>>> Ravi, >> >>>> >> >>>> I like the contrast between Durrell?s Constance and Tennyson?s >> ?Ulysses?: to yield v. not to yield. I think you?re absolutely right in >> this. That?s the Indian metaphysics of Durrell?s philosophy, which is very >> un-Western. As to the rest of the Quintet, it has so many aspects (and >> defects) that readers will be puzzling over these for years to come. I >> don?t think, however, that Durrell himself was ever ?happy.? In this >> regard, he was Odyssean, ?to strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.? >> What he advocated was not necessarily what he practiced. >> >>>> >> >>>> Bruce >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>>> On Sep 28, 2016, at 8:14 PM, Ravi Nambiar > > wrote: >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Bruce >> >>>>> Thanks for your expert comments. You are hundred percent right. The >> Quintet may/will get the fate of The Revolt. I don't speak authoritatively >> at all. I am a humble admirer of Durrell. I just quoted Durrell's own words >> (so that I can escape) only to show that he had not anticipated a >> Quartet-type audience for his Quintet ("The book is really written for >> learned people."); and, in spite of that, he claimed this novel his best. >> My only contention is that it is too early to write off this novel as a >> failure. Also, there are some fine parts which our young scholars >> could/should pursue. Our negative (final) judgement should not, I feel, >> discourage anyone from going into its by-lanes. For example, I liked the >> contrast Durrell made to the concept of Victorian heroism with a/the modern >> heroism: replacing the slogan, "to strive, to seek, to find and not to >> yield" with the slogan, "to surrender, to yield, to abdicate and receive" >> (Constance 269). I don't think substituting the ! >> heroism of Ulysses with that of a Yogi is any kind of philosophy or a >> bad philosophy. Yoga is popular now. Durrell's concern was to make his >> character seek happiness, inner happiness, a kind of"bliss-side up" life >> (the first half of the novel was the war-ridden world). That is why I >> called his novel "Eudaemonistic" novel, the type of novel making its theme >> as a system of ethics that evaluates actions (heroism) in terms of their >> capacity to produce happiness. The Quintet may be a failure, but, it >> certainly gives some narrative clues to future writers. We have had enough >> of realism, surrealism, magic realism, and so on. Why not try metarealism >> also? >> >>>>> My apology to all those who disagree with me. Let us agree to >> disagree for the sake of literature. >> >>>>> Best >> >>>>> Ravi >> >>>>> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> -------------- next part -------------- >> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >> URL: > e36a34c7/attachment-0001.html> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 4 >> Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2016 00:12:57 +0300 >> From: Richard Pine >> To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca, Sumantra Nag , Denise >> Tart , Kennedy Gammage >> >> Subject: [ilds] Chang-Durrell >> Message-ID: >> > gmail.com> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" >> >> The following is the inventory of letters from Jolan Chang to lawrence >> Durrell held in the LD collection at the Universitye Paris X (Nanterre) >> >> RP >> >> >> Letters from *Jolan Chang* (author of *The Tao of Love and Sex*, publ. >> April 1977): 1976-1982 >> >> 1) ALS May 15 1976 to L.D. in English. Re: sending his book to >> Wildwood, printing planned for next spring; A. Nin?s *Diaries*. Asks L.D. >> for choice of title for his book. >> >> 2) ALS April 10 1977 (from Stockholm). Re: his book, just published >> by >> Wildwood and related subjects. >> >> 3) ALS: n.d. (early 1977, Feb 28, from Stockholm). Re: Gail Sheehy?s >> best-selling book *Passages: *she is a Durrell admirer and a devotee of >> the >> ancient Chinese Tao of Loving (ref. to p.313 of her book, ?The sexual >> diamond?, copy enclosed). Concludes: ?knowingly or unknowingly, suddenly >> all the feminists seem to be on the side of the Tao?! Invites L.D. to >> discussion on the subject in London with his daughter, Needham and Gail >> Sheehy. (1 leaf) >> >> + A self-introduction: photocopy of MS. (1 leaf) >> >> + Photo of J.Chang >> >> + Xerox of Wildwood?s ad for *The Tao of Love and Sex* with L.D.?s >> introduction. >> >> 4) Photocopy of Ms *An Ancient Chinese Secret of Love and Sex* (2 >> leaves). >> >> 5) Photocopy of Ts interview, points 5 to 10 (2 leaves). >> >> 6) ALS: n.d. on letterhead of ?The Royal Swedish Yacht Club? 1977. >> Re: >> saving paper (like Needham). Worries about L.D.?s asthma. His book has >> kept >> him busy as it is published in 10 countries: ?a success that would >> surprise >> women editors at Doubleday?!: so much is due to L.D.?s support and >> enthusiasm. Re: a TV programme with L.D. and H. Miller. Asks how and where >> L.D. is going to publish his long essay (*A Smile in the Mind?s Eye*, >> publ. >> 1978). (1 leaf) >> >> 7) ALS: n.d. on letterhead of the RSYC, Stockholm 1977. Regrets >> English is still a foreign language to him. Concern about L.D.?s health. >> Wishes he could live within ?bicycle distance? of L.D. ?Lao Tse did not >> think that travel is necessary?: no invasions, no wars, no problems. Does >> not know how to deal with his US publishers. His health is better and >> better ?drink 4, 5 glasses of water first thing in the morning?). (1 leaf) >> >> 8) ALS: July 23, 1978 from Stockholm. J.C. shows his pleasure at >> success of his book. Invites L.D. to stay with him to work together on the >> subject of the Tao. ?A presumptuous proposal?, he writes. (1 leaf) >> >> + Encloses a letter by E.L. Rossi, a specialist in clinical psychology. (1 >> leaf) >> >> + part of E.L. Rossi?s curriculum vitae. (1 leaf) >> >> 9) ALS: Dec.7, 1978 from Stockholm. Re: on travelling, writing and >> keeping one?s wife! Quotes Danish writer Suzanne Br?gger (a prot?g?e of >> Miller?s) who said ?devoted writers could seldom keep their lovers because >> writing is a demanding and possessive mistress?. (1 leaf) >> >> 10) ALS: Sept.21, 1982 from Stockholm. Hopes to meet L.D. in Paris. >> Comes >> to visit all his publishers in Paris and London. Had a letter from L.D. >> before his usual tour of Greece. Admits ?a worse letter writer like me is >> difficult to find?. Does not sound as warm and confident as he used to. (1 >> leaf) >> -------------- next part -------------- >> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >> URL: > 4e9e49a7/attachment-0001.html> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 5 >> Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 15:21:32 -0700 >> From: Kennedy Gammage >> To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca >> Subject: Re: [ilds] Jolan Chang >> Message-ID: >> > gmail.com> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" >> >> As Bill Murray would say, ?that?s a yes.? Jolan Chang, with all his great >> sexual advice for the priapic old Durrell, must have influenced the >> >> character in Constance. >> >> Which is interesting, because the entangled character, who >> initiated our friends from Monsieur into the gnostic suicide cult of Ophis >> the Snake at Macabru ? was not in Constance?s circle or apparently >> interested in curating his precious fluids. Durrell had already created >> and >> published the Akkad character before he met Chang. Yes or no? >> >> Which may shed some light on the creative process as the Quintet >> developed. >> Or not. >> >> Thanks very much - Ken >> >> >> On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 3:18 PM, Bruce Redwine > > >> wrote: >> >> > Good story! And probably good advice for all and sundry. But who >> follows >> > it! >> > >> > Bruce >> > >> > >> > >> > On Oct 4, 2016, at 3:12 PM, Denise Tart & David Green < >> > dtart at bigpond.net.au> wrote: >> > >> > According to G Bowker the Chinese Taoist philosopher and sexologist, >> with >> > Durrell had been corresponding, visited him in Sommieres at the >> beginning >> > of 1976. At the time Larry was living alone in the gloomy old house in >> one >> > or two rooms. Chang said Durrell ejaculated too much and drank too much >> and >> > needed to stop drinking and only ejaculate occasionally. I wonder how >> much >> > Larry paid him for this advice? Certainly he does not seem to have >> followed >> > it. >> > >> > David. >> > >> > Sent from my iPad >> > >> > On 5 Oct 2016, at 4:54 AM, Bruce Redwine >> > wrote: >> > >> > Ken, >> > >> > Interesting idea, Jolan Chang as ?inspiration? for Affad in *Sebastian.* >> > Chang appears at beginning of *A Smile in the Mind?s Eye* (1980). >> *Sebastian >> > or Ruling Passions* appears in 1983. I first thought Chang was another >> > of Durrell?s inventions?he seemed too improbable. He was, however, a >> real >> > person who wrote *The Tao of Love and Sex: The Ancient Chinese Way to >> > Ecstasy* (1977). They actually met, as MacNiven verifies. The times >> are >> > also right, so maybe there is a connection. I agree?Durrell gets too >> > explicit with Constance and sex. I?d call his treatment highbrow >> > pornography. >> > >> > Bruce >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > . >> > >> > On Oct 3, 2016, at 11:44 AM, Kennedy Gammage > > >> > wrote: >> > >> > Putting this supposition out there for discussion: that Jolan Chang was >> > the inspiration for Sebastian / Affad in the Quintet ? infamously for >> all >> > the annoying tantric sex with-and-in Constance, which I consider >> somewhat >> > of a drawback for the central book in the Quintet and a Booker Prize >> > shortlist. >> > >> > Please feel free to disagree - Ken >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > ILDS mailing list >> > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca >> > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds >> > >> > >> -------------- next part -------------- >> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >> URL: > 44049654/attachment-0001.html> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 6 >> Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2016 02:15:21 +0200 >> From: MarcPiel >> To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca >> Subject: [ilds] Fwd: CENTRE POMPIDOU - ART ET LIBERT? : RUPTURE, >> GUERRE ET SURR?ALISME EN ?GYPTE (1938 -1948) - 19 OCTOBRE 2016 - >> 16 >> JANVIER 2017 >> Message-ID: <9ADCEBE6-3C41-4782-A840-DAC50B24A0C6 at marcpiel.fr> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" >> >> I thought this could interest some if the list! >> The attachment at the end is a press release. >> B R >> Marc >> >> Envoy? de mon iPad >> >> D?but du message transf?r? : >> >> Exp?diteur: PEREIRA Anne-Marie >> Date: 4 octobre 2016 18:55:23 UTC+2 >> Objet: CENTRE POMPIDOU - ART ET LIBERT? : RUPTURE, GUERRE ET SURR?ALISME >> EN ?GYPTE (1938 -1948) - 19 OCTOBRE 2016 - 16 JANVIER 2017 >> >> >> Art et Libert? : Rupture, Guerre et Surr?alisme en ?gypte (1938 ? 1948) >> est la premi?re exposition consacr?e au groupe Art et Libert? ( jama?at >> al-fann wa al-hurriyyah), >> qui a rassembl? autour de Georges Henein une constellation d?artistes et >> ?crivains r?sidant au Caire dans les ann?es 1930 et 1940. >> >> Fond? le 22 d?cembre 1938 ? l?occasion de la publication du manifeste >> Vive l?art d?g?n?r?, le groupe Art et Libert? a fourni ? une jeune >> g?n?ration d?artistes, d?intellectuels et d?activistes >> une plate-forme h?t?rog?ne propice ? de nombreuses r?formes culturelles >> et politiques. Les membres du groupe ont jou? un r?le actif au sein d?un >> r?seau international dynamique >> d?intellectuels et d?artistes li?s ? la mouvance surr?aliste. ? l?aube de >> la Seconde Guerre mondiale et dans une ?gypte sous domination coloniale >> britannique, le groupe Art et Libert? >> s?est inscrit dans un projet culturel et politique international en >> d?fiant le fascisme, le nationalisme et le colonialisme. Questionnant le >> surr?alisme, il a tent? de construire >> un langage litt?raire et pictural contemporain engag? au niveau mondial >> autant qu?enracin? dans les pr?occupations artistiques et politiques >> locales. >> Sur invitation de Catherine David, directrice adjointe du mus?e national >> d?art moderne en charge de la recherche et de la mondialisation, les >> commissaires ind?pendants Sam Bardaouil et Till Fellrath / >> Art Reoriented, ont rassembl? les r?sultats de cinq ann?es de recherches >> approfondies et de centaines d?entretiens men?s sur le terrain en ?gypte et >> dans de nombreux autres pays. >> >> Vous trouverez ci-joint le dossier de presse de l?exposition. >> Le vernissage presse aura lieu, sur invitation, le mercredi 19 octobre >> 2016 de 17h ? 19h 30, Galerie du mus?e et galerie d?art graphique, Mus?e, >> niveau 4. >> Je vous remercie de bien vouloir noter cette date, vous recevrez >> l?invitation ?lectronique dans les prochains jours. >> >> Bien ? vous >> >> >> >> -------------- next part -------------- >> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >> URL: > c9bbc1fd/attachment.html> >> -------------- next part -------------- >> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... >> Name: image001.jpg >> Type: image/jpeg >> Size: 38581 bytes >> Desc: not available >> URL: > c9bbc1fd/attachment.jpg> >> -------------- next part -------------- >> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >> URL: > c9bbc1fd/attachment-0001.html> >> -------------- next part -------------- >> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... >> Name: DP Art et Liberte-1.pdf >> Type: application/pdf >> Size: 1404506 bytes >> Desc: not available >> URL: > c9bbc1fd/attachment.pdf> >> -------------- next part -------------- >> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >> URL: > c9bbc1fd/attachment-0002.html> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Subject: Digest Footer >> >> _______________________________________________ >> ILDS mailing list >> ILDS at lists.uvic.ca >> https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> End of ILDS Digest, Vol 114, Issue 6 >> ************************************ >> > > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bredwine1968 at earthlink.net Thu Oct 6 13:13:06 2016 From: bredwine1968 at earthlink.net (Bruce Redwine) Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2016 13:13:06 -0700 Subject: [ilds] Truth In-Reply-To: References: <66DAA229-D4C8-4E01-A977-DA6E61EEFFA4@earthlink.net> <1A1376ED-305B-403F-B284-546A376FFE6D@earthlink.net> <678AC845-2DAE-40EA-A403-CB826AB09A95@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <88D51BF2-7C23-4935-8F01-D88569225548@earthlink.net> Truth matters. And it particularly matters, as you point out, during an election year in the U.S. when Mr. Donald J. Trump, presidential candidate, is a habitual and egregious liar. That fact may be a context for this discussion. It is one thing, as John Keats does, to get a particular fact wrong, but quite another when Lawrence Durrell, who surely knows his facts, prefers to indulge in ?selective fictions.? White lies or societal niceties, which we all commit, are no excuse for misrepresentations of a higher order. Durrell?s ?selective fictions? licenses too much at times, particularly with reference to his art and self-portrayal. Relativity does not justify dishonesty. I call plagiarism an example of dishonesty?and there are many examples of that in Durrell?s oeuvre, which we have discussed over the years. Re ?Le cercle referm?,? what would you call a last poem at the end of a poet?s last work, one that recapitulates the poet?s life and describes a final closing and ?last goodbye?? I?d call it a summa, autobiographical closure. To suggest that it?s fiction undercuts the poem?s poignancy. Granted that the first two lines are a problem?Durrell was never in Benares?but even that ?fiction? serves as an example of Durrell?s life. So, I smile at that bit of ?selective fiction,? but I?ll give him that as he leaves the stage. Othello does the same thing at the end of Shakespeare?s play. His tale of the ?base Indian? who ?threw a pearl away? distorts and misrepresents what he did to Desdemona. Her horrible death is draped in metaphors. But the speech also illustrates a life full of dazzling diction. Othello?s speech is a beautiful artifact, and Durrell?s final poem is equally beautiful, obscure and allusive, true to its maker. Bruce > On Oct 6, 2016, at 12:16 AM, Richard Pine wrote: > > I have reached the point in life, in lying, in reading and writing when "truth" has ceased to matter. Electing Trump (if it happens) will be a lie, but it will also be a verifiable fact - i.e truth. Every day every one of us tells lies, but they are societal lies, as in "Hello how are you?" "Fine thanks. And you?" "Great". Not "Not so good, my wife just ran off with my best friend and my son was jailed for selling cocaine". We obscure, fudge, conceal, obfuscate so as to present an image.The best possible image that society wants to see. The best possible story that the reader wants to read. > If I decline a dinner invitation on the grounds of too much work, when in 'truth' I just don't want to spend an evening with that person and their guests, am I telling a lie? And if so, a white lie, a black lie or a grey lie? And so what? It was a necessary lie in order to protect myself against boredom. > LD was in his personal life (if there was such a thing) a man incapable - like all of us - of telling the truth. He was in search of himself and he would tell any lies necessary, and push aside all unnecessary truths, to get at that self. You say that PC may not be 'all lies' - so which bits are not lies? And which bits that are 'truthful' are really truthful, or just partially truthful? C'mon. > How can any truth-oriented person read MFOA, knowing that it is one monstrous lie but a damn good story? A principled reader will refuse to read it. And the Bible. And the Sermon on the Mount (both Jesus's and Caradoc's, although Caradoc's was more truthful) > I share the LD view - that it just doesn't matter. And why do you call 'Le cercle referme' an 'autobiographical poem'? What 'proof' have you that it was intended as such? No, mere readerly, critical supposition. If I said that, in calling it that, you were lying, you would, rightly, take offence. > Keats? He was a POET! but you excuse him because he was 'a bad historian' - i.e., he can't be blamed because he didn't tell a lie, just he didn't get the truth that historians would insist on. But if Durrell makes the same mistake, deliberately, he is, apparently, to blame. A liar. Oh dear, you must be a very virtuous person Bruce. And virtue is.....virtual truth, not real truth. ha ha > RP > > On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 12:11 AM, Bruce Redwine > wrote: > Richard, I think we?re back to discussing Durrell?s notion of ?Truth.? (Which differs from mine.) So we have another kind of ?le cercle referm?.? You?re undoubtedly right that Durrell was chiefly a poet and a storyteller, but I have great trouble when he presents (disguises?) certain works as ?fact? (e.g., Prospero?s Cell or his autobiographical poem, ?Le cercle referm??) and then proceeds to embellish and distort. Was he aware of what he was doing? Dunno. If he was aware, isn?t that the definition of lying? Does it matter? Maybe not to many people but to me it does. In Haag?s City of Memory, Yvette Cohen said (more than less) that Durrell couldn?t be trusted to report accurately. At the Durrell Celebration in Alexandria (2007), Penelope Durrell Hope said her mother called PC ?all lies.? It surely wasn?t ?all lies,? but I think a whole lot of fibbing was going on, presumably in the interest of telling a ?good story.? Yes, if Durrell knew there was no fortress at Kurseong but claimed there was, yes, I would object and wonder just what he was up to. Keats can get ?stout Cortez? wrong in ?Chapman?s Homer,? but no one accuses him of lying. Keats was simply a bad historian. Durrell?s ?errors,? if such, are something else again. > > Bruce > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pinedurrellcorfu at gmail.com Thu Oct 6 13:41:20 2016 From: pinedurrellcorfu at gmail.com (Richard Pine) Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2016 23:41:20 +0300 Subject: [ilds] Truth In-Reply-To: <88D51BF2-7C23-4935-8F01-D88569225548@earthlink.net> References: <66DAA229-D4C8-4E01-A977-DA6E61EEFFA4@earthlink.net> <1A1376ED-305B-403F-B284-546A376FFE6D@earthlink.net> <678AC845-2DAE-40EA-A403-CB826AB09A95@earthlink.net> <88D51BF2-7C23-4935-8F01-D88569225548@earthlink.net> Message-ID: Let's stick with Trump. maybe, as President, he will follow Sarkozy's lead and be photographed allegedly reading the Alexandria Quartet. If so, his minders will have scored a major p r triumph and told one of the biggest lies of his career. It is a fact (let's not call it a 'truth') that Trump is within an ass's roar of the White House, even though he is a liar, a cheat, a racist, a philanderer, a sexist, a draft-dodger, and an appallingly bad businessman. Trump is a success because, altho he himself is a fiction, people believe him: he is capitalising on Kurt Schumacher?s 1932 observation, that the best way to appeal to people?s anger is ?ceaselessly mobilising human stupidity? That's an American truth. Canada isn't much better with Truth-dough in power. It doesn't matter to me one little bit that LD, who was almost never in any degree powerful in that sense, told lies, bent the truth, borrowed unashamedly from others' work, misrepresented his personal circumstances, or was a sexist or philanderer SO LONG AS HE WAS A POET AND TOLD A GOOD STORY. Trump matters because his credible story appeals to American readership. Durrell doesn't matter because his story cannot hurt people. He was absolutely right when he said we live lives based on selected fictions. There are two kinds - those that are selected for us, and those that we ourselves select. Almost all his work involves these two types of fiction. And we respond to it because it tells us some 'truth' about ourselves. Truth, if you pursue it long and hard enough, proves itself to be a fiction. RP On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 11:13 PM, Bruce Redwine wrote: > Truth matters. And it particularly matters, as you point out, during an > election year in the U.S. when Mr. Donald J. Trump, presidential candidate, > is a habitual and egregious liar. That fact may be a context for this > discussion. It is one thing, as John Keats does, to get a particular fact > wrong, but quite another when Lawrence Durrell, who surely knows his facts, > prefers to indulge in ?selective fictions.? White lies or societal > niceties, which we all commit, are no excuse for misrepresentations of a > higher order. Durrell?s ?selective fictions? licenses too much at times, > particularly with reference to his art and self-portrayal. Relativity does > not justify dishonesty. I call plagiarism an example of dishonesty?and > there are many examples of that in Durrell?s oeuvre, which we have > discussed over the years. > > Re ?Le cercle referm?,? what would you call a last poem at the end of a > poet?s last work, one that recapitulates the poet?s life and describes a > final closing and ?last goodbye?? I?d call it a summa, autobiographical > closure. To suggest that it?s fiction undercuts the poem?s poignancy. > Granted that the first two lines are a problem?Durrell was never in > Benares?but even that ?fiction? serves as an example of Durrell?s life. > So, I smile at that bit of ?selective fiction,? but I?ll give him that as > he leaves the stage. Othello does the same thing at the end of > Shakespeare?s play. His tale of the ?base Indian? who ?threw a pearl away? > distorts and misrepresents what he did to Desdemona. Her horrible death is > draped in metaphors. But the speech also illustrates a life full of > dazzling diction. Othello?s speech is a beautiful artifact, and Durrell?s > final poem is equally beautiful, obscure and allusive, true to its maker. > > Bruce > > > On Oct 6, 2016, at 12:16 AM, Richard Pine > wrote: > > I have reached the point in life, in lying, in reading and writing when > "truth" has ceased to matter. Electing Trump (if it happens) will be a lie, > but it will also be a verifiable fact - i.e truth. Every day every one of > us tells lies, but they are societal lies, as in "Hello how are you?" "Fine > thanks. And you?" "Great". Not "Not so good, my wife just ran off with my > best friend and my son was jailed for selling cocaine". We obscure, fudge, > conceal, obfuscate so as to present an image.The best possible image that > society wants to see. The best possible story that the reader wants to read. > If I decline a dinner invitation on the grounds of too much work, when in > 'truth' I just don't want to spend an evening with that person and their > guests, am I telling a lie? And if so, a white lie, a black lie or a grey > lie? And so what? It was a necessary lie in order to protect myself > against boredom. > LD was in his personal life (if there was such a thing) a man incapable - > like all of us - of telling the truth. He was in search of himself and he > would tell any lies necessary, and push aside all unnecessary truths, to > get at that self. You say that PC may not be 'all lies' - so which bits > are not lies? And which bits that are 'truthful' are really truthful, or > just partially truthful? C'mon. > How can any truth-oriented person read MFOA, knowing that it is one > monstrous lie but a damn good story? A principled reader will refuse to > read it. And the Bible. And the Sermon on the Mount (both Jesus's and > Caradoc's, although Caradoc's was more truthful) > I share the LD view - that it just doesn't matter. And why do you call 'Le > cercle referme' an 'autobiographical poem'? What 'proof' have you that it > was intended as such? No, mere readerly, critical supposition. If I said > that, in calling it that, you were lying, you would, rightly, take offence. > Keats? He was a POET! but you excuse him because he was 'a bad historian' > - i.e., he can't be blamed because he didn't tell a lie, just he didn't get > the truth that historians would insist on. But if Durrell makes the same > mistake, deliberately, he is, apparently, to blame. A liar. Oh dear, you > must be a very virtuous person Bruce. And virtue is.....virtual truth, not > real truth. ha ha > RP > > On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 12:11 AM, Bruce Redwine > wrote: > >> Richard, I think we?re back to discussing Durrell?s notion of ?Truth.? >> (Which differs from mine.) So we have another kind of ?le cercle >> referm?.? You?re undoubtedly right that Durrell was chiefly a poet and a >> storyteller, but I have great trouble when he presents (disguises?) certain >> works as ?fact? (e.g., *Prospero?s Cell* or his autobiographical poem, >> ?Le cercle referm??) and then proceeds to embellish and distort. Was he >> aware of what he was doing? Dunno. If he was aware, isn?t that the >> definition of lying? Does it matter? Maybe not to many people but to me >> it does. In Haag?s *City of Memory,* Yvette Cohen said (more than less) >> that Durrell couldn?t be trusted to report accurately. At the Durrell >> Celebration in Alexandria (2007), Penelope Durrell Hope said her mother >> called *PC* ?all lies.? It surely wasn?t ?all lies,? but I think a >> whole lot of fibbing was going on, presumably in the interest of telling a >> ?good story.? Yes, if Durrell knew there was no fortress at Kurseong but >> claimed there was, yes, I would object and wonder just what he was up to. >> Keats can get ?stout Cortez? wrong in ?Chapman?s Homer,? but no one accuses >> him of lying. Keats was simply a bad historian. Durrell?s ?errors,? if >> such, are something else again. >> >> Bruce >> >> >> >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bredwine1968 at earthlink.net Thu Oct 6 17:42:55 2016 From: bredwine1968 at earthlink.net (Bruce Redwine) Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2016 17:42:55 -0700 Subject: [ilds] Truth In-Reply-To: References: <66DAA229-D4C8-4E01-A977-DA6E61EEFFA4@earthlink.net> <1A1376ED-305B-403F-B284-546A376FFE6D@earthlink.net> <678AC845-2DAE-40EA-A403-CB826AB09A95@earthlink.net> <88D51BF2-7C23-4935-8F01-D88569225548@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <9A8E6F8C-1A4A-43BF-8FE8-718B5C5AF594@earthlink.net> Richard, you?re right. Let?s put this discussion in perspective. Trump is a lying would-be politician who could do immense harm if elected, whereas Durrell was a poet and storyteller who lied on occasion and harmed no one (beyond close relations). So there is no comparison in that sense. I am bothered, however, by Durrell?s personal philosophy, so far as it advocates or justifies a kind of amorality and self-deception. That aspect of his art and behavior seems to me false. I am not prepared to say that I admire him ?so long as he was a poet and told a good story.? That is, no matter what his faults I support him. This debate stretches far back. Plato doesn?t like poets and wants to ban them from his ideal state. That?s absurd. But Plato believed in truth, and I can see his concerns. So let?s leave it at that. All errors are mine, as writers like to say. Bruce > On Oct 6, 2016, at 1:41 PM, Richard Pine wrote: > > Let's stick with Trump. maybe, as President, he will follow Sarkozy's lead and be photographed allegedly reading the Alexandria Quartet. If so, his minders will have scored a major p r triumph and told one of the biggest lies of his career. It is a fact (let's not call it a 'truth') that Trump is within an ass's roar of the White House, even though he is a liar, a cheat, a racist, a philanderer, a sexist, a draft-dodger, and an appallingly bad businessman. Trump is a success because, altho he himself is a fiction, people believe him: he is capitalising on Kurt Schumacher?s 1932 observation, that the best way to appeal to people?s anger is ?ceaselessly mobilising human stupidity? That's an American truth. Canada isn't much better with Truth-dough in power. > It doesn't matter to me one little bit that LD, who was almost never in any degree powerful in that sense, told lies, bent the truth, borrowed unashamedly from others' work, misrepresented his personal circumstances, or was a sexist or philanderer SO LONG AS HE WAS A POET AND TOLD A GOOD STORY. Trump matters because his credible story appeals to American readership. Durrell doesn't matter because his story cannot hurt people. > He was absolutely right when he said we live lives based on selected fictions. There are two kinds - those that are selected for us, and those that we ourselves select. Almost all his work involves these two types of fiction. And we respond to it because it tells us some 'truth' about ourselves. Truth, if you pursue it long and hard enough, proves itself to be a fiction. > RP > > On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 11:13 PM, Bruce Redwine > wrote: > Truth matters. And it particularly matters, as you point out, during an election year in the U.S. when Mr. Donald J. Trump, presidential candidate, is a habitual and egregious liar. That fact may be a context for this discussion. It is one thing, as John Keats does, to get a particular fact wrong, but quite another when Lawrence Durrell, who surely knows his facts, prefers to indulge in ?selective fictions.? White lies or societal niceties, which we all commit, are no excuse for misrepresentations of a higher order. Durrell?s ?selective fictions? licenses too much at times, particularly with reference to his art and self-portrayal. Relativity does not justify dishonesty. I call plagiarism an example of dishonesty?and there are many examples of that in Durrell?s oeuvre, which we have discussed over the years. > > Re ?Le cercle referm?,? what would you call a last poem at the end of a poet?s last work, one that recapitulates the poet?s life and describes a final closing and ?last goodbye?? I?d call it a summa, autobiographical closure. To suggest that it?s fiction undercuts the poem?s poignancy. Granted that the first two lines are a problem?Durrell was never in Benares?but even that ?fiction? serves as an example of Durrell?s life. So, I smile at that bit of ?selective fiction,? but I?ll give him that as he leaves the stage. Othello does the same thing at the end of Shakespeare?s play. His tale of the ?base Indian? who ?threw a pearl away? distorts and misrepresents what he did to Desdemona. Her horrible death is draped in metaphors. But the speech also illustrates a life full of dazzling diction. Othello?s speech is a beautiful artifact, and Durrell?s final poem is equally beautiful, obscure and allusive, true to its maker. > > Bruce > > >> On Oct 6, 2016, at 12:16 AM, Richard Pine > wrote: >> >> I have reached the point in life, in lying, in reading and writing when "truth" has ceased to matter. Electing Trump (if it happens) will be a lie, but it will also be a verifiable fact - i.e truth. Every day every one of us tells lies, but they are societal lies, as in "Hello how are you?" "Fine thanks. And you?" "Great". Not "Not so good, my wife just ran off with my best friend and my son was jailed for selling cocaine". We obscure, fudge, conceal, obfuscate so as to present an image.The best possible image that society wants to see. The best possible story that the reader wants to read. >> If I decline a dinner invitation on the grounds of too much work, when in 'truth' I just don't want to spend an evening with that person and their guests, am I telling a lie? And if so, a white lie, a black lie or a grey lie? And so what? It was a necessary lie in order to protect myself against boredom. >> LD was in his personal life (if there was such a thing) a man incapable - like all of us - of telling the truth. He was in search of himself and he would tell any lies necessary, and push aside all unnecessary truths, to get at that self. You say that PC may not be 'all lies' - so which bits are not lies? And which bits that are 'truthful' are really truthful, or just partially truthful? C'mon. >> How can any truth-oriented person read MFOA, knowing that it is one monstrous lie but a damn good story? A principled reader will refuse to read it. And the Bible. And the Sermon on the Mount (both Jesus's and Caradoc's, although Caradoc's was more truthful) >> I share the LD view - that it just doesn't matter. And why do you call 'Le cercle referme' an 'autobiographical poem'? What 'proof' have you that it was intended as such? No, mere readerly, critical supposition. If I said that, in calling it that, you were lying, you would, rightly, take offence. >> Keats? He was a POET! but you excuse him because he was 'a bad historian' - i.e., he can't be blamed because he didn't tell a lie, just he didn't get the truth that historians would insist on. But if Durrell makes the same mistake, deliberately, he is, apparently, to blame. A liar. Oh dear, you must be a very virtuous person Bruce. And virtue is.....virtual truth, not real truth. ha ha >> RP >> >> On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 12:11 AM, Bruce Redwine > wrote: >> Richard, I think we?re back to discussing Durrell?s notion of ?Truth.? (Which differs from mine.) So we have another kind of ?le cercle referm?.? You?re undoubtedly right that Durrell was chiefly a poet and a storyteller, but I have great trouble when he presents (disguises?) certain works as ?fact? (e.g., Prospero?s Cell or his autobiographical poem, ?Le cercle referm??) and then proceeds to embellish and distort. Was he aware of what he was doing? Dunno. If he was aware, isn?t that the definition of lying? Does it matter? Maybe not to many people but to me it does. In Haag?s City of Memory, Yvette Cohen said (more than less) that Durrell couldn?t be trusted to report accurately. At the Durrell Celebration in Alexandria (2007), Penelope Durrell Hope said her mother called PC ?all lies.? It surely wasn?t ?all lies,? but I think a whole lot of fibbing was going on, presumably in the interest of telling a ?good story.? Yes, if Durrell knew there was no fortress at Kurseong but claimed there was, yes, I would object and wonder just what he was up to. Keats can get ?stout Cortez? wrong in ?Chapman?s Homer,? but no one accuses him of lying. Keats was simply a bad historian. Durrell?s ?errors,? if such, are something else again. >> >> Bruce >> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pinedurrellcorfu at gmail.com Thu Oct 6 23:45:07 2016 From: pinedurrellcorfu at gmail.com (Richard Pine) Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2016 09:45:07 +0300 Subject: [ilds] Truth In-Reply-To: <9A8E6F8C-1A4A-43BF-8FE8-718B5C5AF594@earthlink.net> References: <66DAA229-D4C8-4E01-A977-DA6E61EEFFA4@earthlink.net> <1A1376ED-305B-403F-B284-546A376FFE6D@earthlink.net> <678AC845-2DAE-40EA-A403-CB826AB09A95@earthlink.net> <88D51BF2-7C23-4935-8F01-D88569225548@earthlink.net> <9A8E6F8C-1A4A-43BF-8FE8-718B5C5AF594@earthlink.net> Message-ID: I don't think LD tried to justify anything, except the importance of being a good writer. As for self-deception, it is part of the selected fictions by which we all live, and I know nothing of amorality even though I live amidst it and probably reek of it myself. If you believe that the meek shall inherit the earth, you will believe anything. Hence Trump. His candidacy is the prime example of a jeu that has gone terribly wrong (the American jeu - not Trump's, since Trump's jeu is going terribly well) RP On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 3:42 AM, Bruce Redwine wrote: > Richard, you?re right. Let?s put this discussion in perspective. Trump > is a lying would-be politician who could do immense harm if elected, > whereas Durrell was a poet and storyteller who lied on occasion and harmed > no one (beyond close relations). So there is no comparison in that sense. > I am bothered, however, by Durrell?s personal philosophy, so far as it > advocates or justifies a kind of amorality and self-deception. That aspect > of his art and behavior seems to me false. I am not prepared to say that I > admire him ?so long as he was a poet and told a good story.? That is, no > matter what his faults I support him. This debate stretches far back. > Plato doesn?t like poets and wants to ban them from his ideal state. > That?s absurd. But Plato believed in truth, and I can see his concerns. > So let?s leave it at that. All errors are mine, as writers like to say. > > Bruce > > > > > > On Oct 6, 2016, at 1:41 PM, Richard Pine > wrote: > > Let's stick with Trump. maybe, as President, he will follow Sarkozy's lead > and be photographed allegedly reading the Alexandria Quartet. If so, his > minders will have scored a major p r triumph and told one of the biggest > lies of his career. It is a fact (let's not call it a 'truth') that Trump > is within an ass's roar of the White House, even though he is a liar, a > cheat, a racist, a philanderer, a sexist, a draft-dodger, and an > appallingly bad businessman. Trump is a success because, altho he himself > is a fiction, people believe him: he is capitalising on Kurt > Schumacher?s 1932 observation, that the best way to appeal to people?s > anger is ?ceaselessly mobilising human stupidity? That's an American > truth. Canada isn't much better with Truth-dough in power. > It doesn't matter to me one little bit that LD, who was almost never in > any degree powerful in that sense, told lies, bent the truth, borrowed > unashamedly from others' work, misrepresented his personal circumstances, > or was a sexist or philanderer SO LONG AS HE WAS A POET AND TOLD A GOOD > STORY. Trump matters because his credible story appeals to American > readership. Durrell doesn't matter because his story cannot hurt people. > He was absolutely right when he said we live lives based on selected > fictions. There are two kinds - those that are selected for us, and those > that we ourselves select. Almost all his work involves these two types of > fiction. And we respond to it because it tells us some 'truth' about > ourselves. Truth, if you pursue it long and hard enough, proves itself to > be a fiction. > RP > > On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 11:13 PM, Bruce Redwine > wrote: > >> Truth matters. And it particularly matters, as you point out, during an >> election year in the U.S. when Mr. Donald J. Trump, presidential candidate, >> is a habitual and egregious liar. That fact may be a context for this >> discussion. It is one thing, as John Keats does, to get a particular fact >> wrong, but quite another when Lawrence Durrell, who surely knows his facts, >> prefers to indulge in ?selective fictions.? White lies or societal >> niceties, which we all commit, are no excuse for misrepresentations of a >> higher order. Durrell?s ?selective fictions? licenses too much at times, >> particularly with reference to his art and self-portrayal. Relativity does >> not justify dishonesty. I call plagiarism an example of dishonesty?and >> there are many examples of that in Durrell?s oeuvre, which we have >> discussed over the years. >> >> Re ?Le cercle referm?,? what would you call a last poem at the end of a >> poet?s last work, one that recapitulates the poet?s life and describes a >> final closing and ?last goodbye?? I?d call it a summa, autobiographical >> closure. To suggest that it?s fiction undercuts the poem?s poignancy. >> Granted that the first two lines are a problem?Durrell was never in >> Benares?but even that ?fiction? serves as an example of Durrell?s life. >> So, I smile at that bit of ?selective fiction,? but I?ll give him that as >> he leaves the stage. Othello does the same thing at the end of >> Shakespeare?s play. His tale of the ?base Indian? who ?threw a pearl away? >> distorts and misrepresents what he did to Desdemona. Her horrible death is >> draped in metaphors. But the speech also illustrates a life full of >> dazzling diction. Othello?s speech is a beautiful artifact, and Durrell?s >> final poem is equally beautiful, obscure and allusive, true to its maker. >> >> Bruce >> >> >> On Oct 6, 2016, at 12:16 AM, Richard Pine >> wrote: >> >> I have reached the point in life, in lying, in reading and writing when >> "truth" has ceased to matter. Electing Trump (if it happens) will be a lie, >> but it will also be a verifiable fact - i.e truth. Every day every one of >> us tells lies, but they are societal lies, as in "Hello how are you?" "Fine >> thanks. And you?" "Great". Not "Not so good, my wife just ran off with my >> best friend and my son was jailed for selling cocaine". We obscure, fudge, >> conceal, obfuscate so as to present an image.The best possible image that >> society wants to see. The best possible story that the reader wants to read. >> If I decline a dinner invitation on the grounds of too much work, when in >> 'truth' I just don't want to spend an evening with that person and their >> guests, am I telling a lie? And if so, a white lie, a black lie or a grey >> lie? And so what? It was a necessary lie in order to protect myself >> against boredom. >> LD was in his personal life (if there was such a thing) a man incapable - >> like all of us - of telling the truth. He was in search of himself and he >> would tell any lies necessary, and push aside all unnecessary truths, to >> get at that self. You say that PC may not be 'all lies' - so which bits >> are not lies? And which bits that are 'truthful' are really truthful, or >> just partially truthful? C'mon. >> How can any truth-oriented person read MFOA, knowing that it is one >> monstrous lie but a damn good story? A principled reader will refuse to >> read it. And the Bible. And the Sermon on the Mount (both Jesus's and >> Caradoc's, although Caradoc's was more truthful) >> I share the LD view - that it just doesn't matter. And why do you call >> 'Le cercle referme' an 'autobiographical poem'? What 'proof' have you that >> it was intended as such? No, mere readerly, critical supposition. If I said >> that, in calling it that, you were lying, you would, rightly, take offence. >> Keats? He was a POET! but you excuse him because he was 'a bad historian' >> - i.e., he can't be blamed because he didn't tell a lie, just he didn't get >> the truth that historians would insist on. But if Durrell makes the same >> mistake, deliberately, he is, apparently, to blame. A liar. Oh dear, you >> must be a very virtuous person Bruce. And virtue is.....virtual truth, not >> real truth. ha ha >> RP >> >> On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 12:11 AM, Bruce Redwine < >> bredwine1968 at earthlink.net> wrote: >> >>> Richard, I think we?re back to discussing Durrell?s notion of ?Truth.? >>> (Which differs from mine.) So we have another kind of ?le cercle >>> referm?.? You?re undoubtedly right that Durrell was chiefly a poet and a >>> storyteller, but I have great trouble when he presents (disguises?) certain >>> works as ?fact? (e.g., *Prospero?s Cell* or his autobiographical poem, >>> ?Le cercle referm??) and then proceeds to embellish and distort. Was he >>> aware of what he was doing? Dunno. If he was aware, isn?t that the >>> definition of lying? Does it matter? Maybe not to many people but to me >>> it does. In Haag?s *City of Memory,* Yvette Cohen said (more than >>> less) that Durrell couldn?t be trusted to report accurately. At the >>> Durrell Celebration in Alexandria (2007), Penelope Durrell Hope said her >>> mother called *PC* ?all lies.? It surely wasn?t ?all lies,? but I >>> think a whole lot of fibbing was going on, presumably in the interest of >>> telling a ?good story.? Yes, if Durrell knew there was no fortress at >>> Kurseong but claimed there was, yes, I would object and wonder just what he >>> was up to. Keats can get ?stout Cortez? wrong in ?Chapman?s Homer,? but no >>> one accuses him of lying. Keats was simply a bad historian. Durrell?s >>> ?errors,? if such, are something else again. >>> >>> Bruce >>> >>> > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bredwine1968 at earthlink.net Fri Oct 7 11:16:23 2016 From: bredwine1968 at earthlink.net (Bruce Redwine) Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2016 11:16:23 -0700 Subject: [ilds] Truth In-Reply-To: References: <66DAA229-D4C8-4E01-A977-DA6E61EEFFA4@earthlink.net> <1A1376ED-305B-403F-B284-546A376FFE6D@earthlink.net> <678AC845-2DAE-40EA-A403-CB826AB09A95@earthlink.net> <88D51BF2-7C23-4935-8F01-D88569225548@earthlink.net> <9A8E6F8C-1A4A-43BF-8FE8-718B5C5AF594@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <4F29EE36-54FF-4771-B812-8E820C291170@earthlink.net> Here we differ. I would say major parts of Durrell?s oeuvre are a justification or advocacy of a way of life. In their letters, Durrell and Miller call themselves religious writers. I don?t take this to mean ?religious? in the sense of Milton?s to "justify the ways of God to men,? rather ?religious" as a way of life. Way as Tao. (Remember, Durrell called himself a Taoist.) And what is religion if not a way of believing and living? As to self-deception, the self as ?selective fictions? speaks for itself. Bruce > On Oct 6, 2016, at 11:45 PM, Richard Pine wrote: > > I don't think LD tried to justify anything, except the importance of being a good writer. As for self-deception, it is part of the selected fictions by which we all live, and I know nothing of amorality even though I live amidst it and probably reek of it myself. If you believe that the meek shall inherit the earth, you will believe anything. Hence Trump. His candidacy is the prime example of a jeu that has gone terribly wrong (the American jeu - not Trump's, since Trump's jeu is going terribly well) > RP > > On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 3:42 AM, Bruce Redwine > wrote: > Richard, you?re right. Let?s put this discussion in perspective. Trump is a lying would-be politician who could do immense harm if elected, whereas Durrell was a poet and storyteller who lied on occasion and harmed no one (beyond close relations). So there is no comparison in that sense. I am bothered, however, by Durrell?s personal philosophy, so far as it advocates or justifies a kind of amorality and self-deception. That aspect of his art and behavior seems to me false. I am not prepared to say that I admire him ?so long as he was a poet and told a good story.? That is, no matter what his faults I support him. This debate stretches far back. Plato doesn?t like poets and wants to ban them from his ideal state. That?s absurd. But Plato believed in truth, and I can see his concerns. So let?s leave it at that. All errors are mine, as writers like to say. > > Bruce > > > > > >> On Oct 6, 2016, at 1:41 PM, Richard Pine > wrote: >> >> Let's stick with Trump. maybe, as President, he will follow Sarkozy's lead and be photographed allegedly reading the Alexandria Quartet. If so, his minders will have scored a major p r triumph and told one of the biggest lies of his career. It is a fact (let's not call it a 'truth') that Trump is within an ass's roar of the White House, even though he is a liar, a cheat, a racist, a philanderer, a sexist, a draft-dodger, and an appallingly bad businessman. Trump is a success because, altho he himself is a fiction, people believe him: he is capitalising on Kurt Schumacher?s 1932 observation, that the best way to appeal to people?s anger is ?ceaselessly mobilising human stupidity? That's an American truth. Canada isn't much better with Truth-dough in power. >> It doesn't matter to me one little bit that LD, who was almost never in any degree powerful in that sense, told lies, bent the truth, borrowed unashamedly from others' work, misrepresented his personal circumstances, or was a sexist or philanderer SO LONG AS HE WAS A POET AND TOLD A GOOD STORY. Trump matters because his credible story appeals to American readership. Durrell doesn't matter because his story cannot hurt people. >> He was absolutely right when he said we live lives based on selected fictions. There are two kinds - those that are selected for us, and those that we ourselves select. Almost all his work involves these two types of fiction. And we respond to it because it tells us some 'truth' about ourselves. Truth, if you pursue it long and hard enough, proves itself to be a fiction. >> RP >> >> On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 11:13 PM, Bruce Redwine > wrote: >> Truth matters. And it particularly matters, as you point out, during an election year in the U.S. when Mr. Donald J. Trump, presidential candidate, is a habitual and egregious liar. That fact may be a context for this discussion. It is one thing, as John Keats does, to get a particular fact wrong, but quite another when Lawrence Durrell, who surely knows his facts, prefers to indulge in ?selective fictions.? White lies or societal niceties, which we all commit, are no excuse for misrepresentations of a higher order. Durrell?s ?selective fictions? licenses too much at times, particularly with reference to his art and self-portrayal. Relativity does not justify dishonesty. I call plagiarism an example of dishonesty?and there are many examples of that in Durrell?s oeuvre, which we have discussed over the years. >> >> Re ?Le cercle referm?,? what would you call a last poem at the end of a poet?s last work, one that recapitulates the poet?s life and describes a final closing and ?last goodbye?? I?d call it a summa, autobiographical closure. To suggest that it?s fiction undercuts the poem?s poignancy. Granted that the first two lines are a problem?Durrell was never in Benares?but even that ?fiction? serves as an example of Durrell?s life. So, I smile at that bit of ?selective fiction,? but I?ll give him that as he leaves the stage. Othello does the same thing at the end of Shakespeare?s play. His tale of the ?base Indian? who ?threw a pearl away? distorts and misrepresents what he did to Desdemona. Her horrible death is draped in metaphors. But the speech also illustrates a life full of dazzling diction. Othello?s speech is a beautiful artifact, and Durrell?s final poem is equally beautiful, obscure and allusive, true to its maker. >> >> Bruce >> >> >>> On Oct 6, 2016, at 12:16 AM, Richard Pine > wrote: >>> >>> I have reached the point in life, in lying, in reading and writing when "truth" has ceased to matter. Electing Trump (if it happens) will be a lie, but it will also be a verifiable fact - i.e truth. Every day every one of us tells lies, but they are societal lies, as in "Hello how are you?" "Fine thanks. And you?" "Great". Not "Not so good, my wife just ran off with my best friend and my son was jailed for selling cocaine". We obscure, fudge, conceal, obfuscate so as to present an image.The best possible image that society wants to see. The best possible story that the reader wants to read. >>> If I decline a dinner invitation on the grounds of too much work, when in 'truth' I just don't want to spend an evening with that person and their guests, am I telling a lie? And if so, a white lie, a black lie or a grey lie? And so what? It was a necessary lie in order to protect myself against boredom. >>> LD was in his personal life (if there was such a thing) a man incapable - like all of us - of telling the truth. He was in search of himself and he would tell any lies necessary, and push aside all unnecessary truths, to get at that self. You say that PC may not be 'all lies' - so which bits are not lies? And which bits that are 'truthful' are really truthful, or just partially truthful? C'mon. >>> How can any truth-oriented person read MFOA, knowing that it is one monstrous lie but a damn good story? A principled reader will refuse to read it. And the Bible. And the Sermon on the Mount (both Jesus's and Caradoc's, although Caradoc's was more truthful) >>> I share the LD view - that it just doesn't matter. And why do you call 'Le cercle referme' an 'autobiographical poem'? What 'proof' have you that it was intended as such? No, mere readerly, critical supposition. If I said that, in calling it that, you were lying, you would, rightly, take offence. >>> Keats? He was a POET! but you excuse him because he was 'a bad historian' - i.e., he can't be blamed because he didn't tell a lie, just he didn't get the truth that historians would insist on. But if Durrell makes the same mistake, deliberately, he is, apparently, to blame. A liar. Oh dear, you must be a very virtuous person Bruce. And virtue is.....virtual truth, not real truth. ha ha >>> RP >>> >>> On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 12:11 AM, Bruce Redwine > wrote: >>> Richard, I think we?re back to discussing Durrell?s notion of ?Truth.? (Which differs from mine.) So we have another kind of ?le cercle referm?.? You?re undoubtedly right that Durrell was chiefly a poet and a storyteller, but I have great trouble when he presents (disguises?) certain works as ?fact? (e.g., Prospero?s Cell or his autobiographical poem, ?Le cercle referm??) and then proceeds to embellish and distort. Was he aware of what he was doing? Dunno. If he was aware, isn?t that the definition of lying? Does it matter? Maybe not to many people but to me it does. In Haag?s City of Memory, Yvette Cohen said (more than less) that Durrell couldn?t be trusted to report accurately. At the Durrell Celebration in Alexandria (2007), Penelope Durrell Hope said her mother called PC ?all lies.? It surely wasn?t ?all lies,? but I think a whole lot of fibbing was going on, presumably in the interest of telling a ?good story.? Yes, if Durrell knew there was no fortress at Kurseong but claimed there was, yes, I would object and wonder just what he was up to. Keats can get ?stout Cortez? wrong in ?Chapman?s Homer,? but no one accuses him of lying. Keats was simply a bad historian. Durrell?s ?errors,? if such, are something else again. >>> >>> Bruce >>> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cnncravi at gmail.com Sat Oct 8 22:20:48 2016 From: cnncravi at gmail.com (Ravi Nambiar) Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2016 10:50:48 +0530 Subject: [ilds] ILDS Digest, Vol 114, Issue 9 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Truth and untruth! Durrell and Trump! I am sorry to say that we are insulting Durrell by comparing Trump with him, or Durrell with Trump. I doubt whether Trump has ever read a poem or a novel. True or false, like it or not, the truth is that there is enough of Americanism in Trump. That is why he gets followers. We enjoy *Alexandria Quartet* because there is Darley's or Justine's or Melissa's experience (at least partly) in each of us or some of us, the readers. That is the truth and this is what literature is expected to do. We don't have to count the number of times Darley slept with Melissa or Justine with the number of times Durrell slept with any woman, and thus discover truth. We don't enjoy the *Quintet* because we, as readers, may not have the experience of Affad, like his penetrating in Tantric style and then reflecting, or of his joyful acceptance of death. That is also truth. Ravi On Sun, Oct 9, 2016 at 12:30 AM, wrote: > 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: Truth (Bruce Redwine) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2016 11:16:23 -0700 > From: Bruce Redwine > To: Sumantra Nag > Cc: Bruce Redwine > Subject: Re: [ilds] Truth > Message-ID: <4F29EE36-54FF-4771-B812-8E820C291170 at earthlink.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > Here we differ. I would say major parts of Durrell?s oeuvre are a > justification or advocacy of a way of life. In their letters, Durrell and > Miller call themselves religious writers. I don?t take this to mean > ?religious? in the sense of Milton?s to "justify the ways of God to men,? > rather ?religious" as a way of life. Way as Tao. (Remember, Durrell > called himself a Taoist.) And what is religion if not a way of believing > and living? As to self-deception, the self as ?selective fictions? speaks > for itself. > > Bruce > > > > On Oct 6, 2016, at 11:45 PM, Richard Pine > wrote: > > > > I don't think LD tried to justify anything, except the importance of > being a good writer. As for self-deception, it is part of the selected > fictions by which we all live, and I know nothing of amorality even though > I live amidst it and probably reek of it myself. If you believe that the > meek shall inherit the earth, you will believe anything. Hence Trump. His > candidacy is the prime example of a jeu that has gone terribly wrong (the > American jeu - not Trump's, since Trump's jeu is going terribly well) > > RP > > > > On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 3:42 AM, Bruce Redwine < > bredwine1968 at earthlink.net > wrote: > > Richard, you?re right. Let?s put this discussion in perspective. Trump > is a lying would-be politician who could do immense harm if elected, > whereas Durrell was a poet and storyteller who lied on occasion and harmed > no one (beyond close relations). So there is no comparison in that sense. > I am bothered, however, by Durrell?s personal philosophy, so far as it > advocates or justifies a kind of amorality and self-deception. That aspect > of his art and behavior seems to me false. I am not prepared to say that I > admire him ?so long as he was a poet and told a good story.? That is, no > matter what his faults I support him. This debate stretches far back. > Plato doesn?t like poets and wants to ban them from his ideal state. > That?s absurd. But Plato believed in truth, and I can see his concerns. > So let?s leave it at that. All errors are mine, as writers like to say. > > > > Bruce > > > > > > > > > > > >> On Oct 6, 2016, at 1:41 PM, Richard Pine > wrote: > >> > >> Let's stick with Trump. maybe, as President, he will follow Sarkozy's > lead and be photographed allegedly reading the Alexandria Quartet. If so, > his minders will have scored a major p r triumph and told one of the > biggest lies of his career. It is a fact (let's not call it a 'truth') that > Trump is within an ass's roar of the White House, even though he is a liar, > a cheat, a racist, a philanderer, a sexist, a draft-dodger, and an > appallingly bad businessman. Trump is a success because, altho he himself > is a fiction, people believe him: he is capitalising on Kurt Schumacher?s > 1932 observation, that the best way to appeal to people?s anger is > ?ceaselessly mobilising human stupidity? That's an American truth. Canada > isn't much better with Truth-dough in power. > >> It doesn't matter to me one little bit that LD, who was almost never in > any degree powerful in that sense, told lies, bent the truth, borrowed > unashamedly from others' work, misrepresented his personal circumstances, > or was a sexist or philanderer SO LONG AS HE WAS A POET AND TOLD A GOOD > STORY. Trump matters because his credible story appeals to American > readership. Durrell doesn't matter because his story cannot hurt people. > >> He was absolutely right when he said we live lives based on selected > fictions. There are two kinds - those that are selected for us, and those > that we ourselves select. Almost all his work involves these two types of > fiction. And we respond to it because it tells us some 'truth' about > ourselves. Truth, if you pursue it long and hard enough, proves itself to > be a fiction. > >> RP > >> > >> On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 11:13 PM, Bruce Redwine < > bredwine1968 at earthlink.net > wrote: > >> Truth matters. And it particularly matters, as you point out, during > an election year in the U.S. when Mr. Donald J. Trump, presidential > candidate, is a habitual and egregious liar. That fact may be a context > for this discussion. It is one thing, as John Keats does, to get a > particular fact wrong, but quite another when Lawrence Durrell, who surely > knows his facts, prefers to indulge in ?selective fictions.? White lies or > societal niceties, which we all commit, are no excuse for > misrepresentations of a higher order. Durrell?s ?selective fictions? > licenses too much at times, particularly with reference to his art and > self-portrayal. Relativity does not justify dishonesty. I call plagiarism > an example of dishonesty?and there are many examples of that in Durrell?s > oeuvre, which we have discussed over the years. > >> > >> Re ?Le cercle referm?,? what would you call a last poem at the end of a > poet?s last work, one that recapitulates the poet?s life and describes a > final closing and ?last goodbye?? I?d call it a summa, autobiographical > closure. To suggest that it?s fiction undercuts the poem?s poignancy. > Granted that the first two lines are a problem?Durrell was never in > Benares?but even that ?fiction? serves as an example of Durrell?s life. > So, I smile at that bit of ?selective fiction,? but I?ll give him that as > he leaves the stage. Othello does the same thing at the end of > Shakespeare?s play. His tale of the ?base Indian? who ?threw a pearl away? > distorts and misrepresents what he did to Desdemona. Her horrible death is > draped in metaphors. But the speech also illustrates a life full of > dazzling diction. Othello?s speech is a beautiful artifact, and Durrell?s > final poem is equally beautiful, obscure and allusive, true to its maker. > >> > >> Bruce > >> > >> > >>> On Oct 6, 2016, at 12:16 AM, Richard Pine > wrote: > >>> > >>> I have reached the point in life, in lying, in reading and writing > when "truth" has ceased to matter. Electing Trump (if it happens) will be a > lie, but it will also be a verifiable fact - i.e truth. Every day every one > of us tells lies, but they are societal lies, as in "Hello how are you?" > "Fine thanks. And you?" "Great". Not "Not so good, my wife just ran off > with my best friend and my son was jailed for selling cocaine". We obscure, > fudge, conceal, obfuscate so as to present an image.The best possible image > that society wants to see. The best possible story that the reader wants to > read. > >>> If I decline a dinner invitation on the grounds of too much work, when > in 'truth' I just don't want to spend an evening with that person and their > guests, am I telling a lie? And if so, a white lie, a black lie or a grey > lie? And so what? It was a necessary lie in order to protect myself > against boredom. > >>> LD was in his personal life (if there was such a thing) a man > incapable - like all of us - of telling the truth. He was in search of > himself and he would tell any lies necessary, and push aside all > unnecessary truths, to get at that self. You say that PC may not be 'all > lies' - so which bits are not lies? And which bits that are 'truthful' are > really truthful, or just partially truthful? C'mon. > >>> How can any truth-oriented person read MFOA, knowing that it is one > monstrous lie but a damn good story? A principled reader will refuse to > read it. And the Bible. And the Sermon on the Mount (both Jesus's and > Caradoc's, although Caradoc's was more truthful) > >>> I share the LD view - that it just doesn't matter. And why do you call > 'Le cercle referme' an 'autobiographical poem'? What 'proof' have you that > it was intended as such? No, mere readerly, critical supposition. If I said > that, in calling it that, you were lying, you would, rightly, take offence. > >>> Keats? He was a POET! but you excuse him because he was 'a bad > historian' - i.e., he can't be blamed because he didn't tell a lie, just he > didn't get the truth that historians would insist on. But if Durrell makes > the same mistake, deliberately, he is, apparently, to blame. A liar. Oh > dear, you must be a very virtuous person Bruce. And virtue is.....virtual > truth, not real truth. ha ha > >>> RP > >>> > >>> On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 12:11 AM, Bruce Redwine < > bredwine1968 at earthlink.net > wrote: > >>> Richard, I think we?re back to discussing Durrell?s notion of > ?Truth.? (Which differs from mine.) So we have another kind of ?le cercle > referm?.? You?re undoubtedly right that Durrell was chiefly a poet and a > storyteller, but I have great trouble when he presents (disguises?) certain > works as ?fact? (e.g., Prospero?s Cell or his autobiographical poem, ?Le > cercle referm??) and then proceeds to embellish and distort. Was he aware > of what he was doing? Dunno. If he was aware, isn?t that the definition > of lying? Does it matter? Maybe not to many people but to me it does. In > Haag?s City of Memory, Yvette Cohen said (more than less) that Durrell > couldn?t be trusted to report accurately. At the Durrell Celebration in > Alexandria (2007), Penelope Durrell Hope said her mother called PC ?all > lies.? It surely wasn?t ?all lies,? but I think a whole lot of fibbing was > going on, presumably in the interest of telling a ?good story.? Yes, if > Durrell knew there was no fortress! > at Kurseong but claimed there was, yes, I would object and wonder just > what he was up to. Keats can get ?stout Cortez? wrong in ?Chapman?s > Homer,? but no one accuses him of lying. Keats was simply a bad > historian. Durrell?s ?errors,? if such, are something else again. > >>> > >>> Bruce > >>> > > > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: 20161007/d30afda1/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Subject: Digest Footer > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > > ------------------------------ > > End of ILDS Digest, Vol 114, Issue 9 > ************************************ > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pinedurrellcorfu at gmail.com Sun Oct 9 07:00:30 2016 From: pinedurrellcorfu at gmail.com (Richard Pine) Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2016 17:00:30 +0300 Subject: [ilds] ILDS Digest, Vol 114, Issue 9 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Ravi, no-one is comparing Trump and Durrell. But it might be interesting if they did. RP On Sun, Oct 9, 2016 at 8:20 AM, Ravi Nambiar wrote: > Truth and untruth! Durrell and Trump! I am sorry to say that we are > insulting Durrell by comparing Trump with him, or Durrell with Trump. I > doubt whether Trump has ever read a poem or a novel. True or false, like it > or not, the truth is that there is enough of Americanism in Trump. That is > why he gets followers. We enjoy *Alexandria Quartet* because there is > Darley's or Justine's or Melissa's experience (at least partly) in each of > us or some of us, the readers. That is the truth and this is what > literature is expected to do. We don't have to count the number of times > Darley slept with Melissa or Justine with the number of times Durrell slept > with any woman, and thus discover truth. We don't enjoy the *Quintet* because > we, as readers, may not have the experience of Affad, like his penetrating > in Tantric style and then reflecting, or of his joyful acceptance of death. > That is also truth. > Ravi > > On Sun, Oct 9, 2016 at 12:30 AM, wrote: > >> 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: Truth (Bruce Redwine) >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Message: 1 >> Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2016 11:16:23 -0700 >> From: Bruce Redwine >> To: Sumantra Nag >> Cc: Bruce Redwine >> Subject: Re: [ilds] Truth >> Message-ID: <4F29EE36-54FF-4771-B812-8E820C291170 at earthlink.net> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" >> >> Here we differ. I would say major parts of Durrell?s oeuvre are a >> justification or advocacy of a way of life. In their letters, Durrell and >> Miller call themselves religious writers. I don?t take this to mean >> ?religious? in the sense of Milton?s to "justify the ways of God to men,? >> rather ?religious" as a way of life. Way as Tao. (Remember, Durrell >> called himself a Taoist.) And what is religion if not a way of believing >> and living? As to self-deception, the self as ?selective fictions? speaks >> for itself. >> >> Bruce >> >> >> > On Oct 6, 2016, at 11:45 PM, Richard Pine >> wrote: >> > >> > I don't think LD tried to justify anything, except the importance of >> being a good writer. As for self-deception, it is part of the selected >> fictions by which we all live, and I know nothing of amorality even though >> I live amidst it and probably reek of it myself. If you believe that the >> meek shall inherit the earth, you will believe anything. Hence Trump. His >> candidacy is the prime example of a jeu that has gone terribly wrong (the >> American jeu - not Trump's, since Trump's jeu is going terribly well) >> > RP >> > >> > On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 3:42 AM, Bruce Redwine < >> bredwine1968 at earthlink.net > wrote: >> > Richard, you?re right. Let?s put this discussion in perspective. >> Trump is a lying would-be politician who could do immense harm if elected, >> whereas Durrell was a poet and storyteller who lied on occasion and harmed >> no one (beyond close relations). So there is no comparison in that sense. >> I am bothered, however, by Durrell?s personal philosophy, so far as it >> advocates or justifies a kind of amorality and self-deception. That aspect >> of his art and behavior seems to me false. I am not prepared to say that I >> admire him ?so long as he was a poet and told a good story.? That is, no >> matter what his faults I support him. This debate stretches far back. >> Plato doesn?t like poets and wants to ban them from his ideal state. >> That?s absurd. But Plato believed in truth, and I can see his concerns. >> So let?s leave it at that. All errors are mine, as writers like to say. >> > >> > Bruce >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >> On Oct 6, 2016, at 1:41 PM, Richard Pine > > wrote: >> >> >> >> Let's stick with Trump. maybe, as President, he will follow Sarkozy's >> lead and be photographed allegedly reading the Alexandria Quartet. If so, >> his minders will have scored a major p r triumph and told one of the >> biggest lies of his career. It is a fact (let's not call it a 'truth') that >> Trump is within an ass's roar of the White House, even though he is a liar, >> a cheat, a racist, a philanderer, a sexist, a draft-dodger, and an >> appallingly bad businessman. Trump is a success because, altho he himself >> is a fiction, people believe him: he is capitalising on Kurt Schumacher?s >> 1932 observation, that the best way to appeal to people?s anger is >> ?ceaselessly mobilising human stupidity? That's an American truth. Canada >> isn't much better with Truth-dough in power. >> >> It doesn't matter to me one little bit that LD, who was almost never >> in any degree powerful in that sense, told lies, bent the truth, borrowed >> unashamedly from others' work, misrepresented his personal circumstances, >> or was a sexist or philanderer SO LONG AS HE WAS A POET AND TOLD A GOOD >> STORY. Trump matters because his credible story appeals to American >> readership. Durrell doesn't matter because his story cannot hurt people. >> >> He was absolutely right when he said we live lives based on selected >> fictions. There are two kinds - those that are selected for us, and those >> that we ourselves select. Almost all his work involves these two types of >> fiction. And we respond to it because it tells us some 'truth' about >> ourselves. Truth, if you pursue it long and hard enough, proves itself to >> be a fiction. >> >> RP >> >> >> >> On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 11:13 PM, Bruce Redwine < >> bredwine1968 at earthlink.net > wrote: >> >> Truth matters. And it particularly matters, as you point out, during >> an election year in the U.S. when Mr. Donald J. Trump, presidential >> candidate, is a habitual and egregious liar. That fact may be a context >> for this discussion. It is one thing, as John Keats does, to get a >> particular fact wrong, but quite another when Lawrence Durrell, who surely >> knows his facts, prefers to indulge in ?selective fictions.? White lies or >> societal niceties, which we all commit, are no excuse for >> misrepresentations of a higher order. Durrell?s ?selective fictions? >> licenses too much at times, particularly with reference to his art and >> self-portrayal. Relativity does not justify dishonesty. I call plagiarism >> an example of dishonesty?and there are many examples of that in Durrell?s >> oeuvre, which we have discussed over the years. >> >> >> >> Re ?Le cercle referm?,? what would you call a last poem at the end of >> a poet?s last work, one that recapitulates the poet?s life and describes a >> final closing and ?last goodbye?? I?d call it a summa, autobiographical >> closure. To suggest that it?s fiction undercuts the poem?s poignancy. >> Granted that the first two lines are a problem?Durrell was never in >> Benares?but even that ?fiction? serves as an example of Durrell?s life. >> So, I smile at that bit of ?selective fiction,? but I?ll give him that as >> he leaves the stage. Othello does the same thing at the end of >> Shakespeare?s play. His tale of the ?base Indian? who ?threw a pearl away? >> distorts and misrepresents what he did to Desdemona. Her horrible death is >> draped in metaphors. But the speech also illustrates a life full of >> dazzling diction. Othello?s speech is a beautiful artifact, and Durrell?s >> final poem is equally beautiful, obscure and allusive, true to its maker. >> >> >> >> Bruce >> >> >> >> >> >>> On Oct 6, 2016, at 12:16 AM, Richard Pine > > wrote: >> >>> >> >>> I have reached the point in life, in lying, in reading and writing >> when "truth" has ceased to matter. Electing Trump (if it happens) will be a >> lie, but it will also be a verifiable fact - i.e truth. Every day every one >> of us tells lies, but they are societal lies, as in "Hello how are you?" >> "Fine thanks. And you?" "Great". Not "Not so good, my wife just ran off >> with my best friend and my son was jailed for selling cocaine". We obscure, >> fudge, conceal, obfuscate so as to present an image.The best possible image >> that society wants to see. The best possible story that the reader wants to >> read. >> >>> If I decline a dinner invitation on the grounds of too much work, >> when in 'truth' I just don't want to spend an evening with that person and >> their guests, am I telling a lie? And if so, a white lie, a black lie or a >> grey lie? And so what? It was a necessary lie in order to protect myself >> against boredom. >> >>> LD was in his personal life (if there was such a thing) a man >> incapable - like all of us - of telling the truth. He was in search of >> himself and he would tell any lies necessary, and push aside all >> unnecessary truths, to get at that self. You say that PC may not be 'all >> lies' - so which bits are not lies? And which bits that are 'truthful' are >> really truthful, or just partially truthful? C'mon. >> >>> How can any truth-oriented person read MFOA, knowing that it is one >> monstrous lie but a damn good story? A principled reader will refuse to >> read it. And the Bible. And the Sermon on the Mount (both Jesus's and >> Caradoc's, although Caradoc's was more truthful) >> >>> I share the LD view - that it just doesn't matter. And why do you >> call 'Le cercle referme' an 'autobiographical poem'? What 'proof' have you >> that it was intended as such? No, mere readerly, critical supposition. If I >> said that, in calling it that, you were lying, you would, rightly, take >> offence. >> >>> Keats? He was a POET! but you excuse him because he was 'a bad >> historian' - i.e., he can't be blamed because he didn't tell a lie, just he >> didn't get the truth that historians would insist on. But if Durrell makes >> the same mistake, deliberately, he is, apparently, to blame. A liar. Oh >> dear, you must be a very virtuous person Bruce. And virtue is.....virtual >> truth, not real truth. ha ha >> >>> RP >> >>> >> >>> On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 12:11 AM, Bruce Redwine < >> bredwine1968 at earthlink.net > wrote: >> >>> Richard, I think we?re back to discussing Durrell?s notion of >> ?Truth.? (Which differs from mine.) So we have another kind of ?le cercle >> referm?.? You?re undoubtedly right that Durrell was chiefly a poet and a >> storyteller, but I have great trouble when he presents (disguises?) certain >> works as ?fact? (e.g., Prospero?s Cell or his autobiographical poem, ?Le >> cercle referm??) and then proceeds to embellish and distort. Was he aware >> of what he was doing? Dunno. If he was aware, isn?t that the definition >> of lying? Does it matter? Maybe not to many people but to me it does. In >> Haag?s City of Memory, Yvette Cohen said (more than less) that Durrell >> couldn?t be trusted to report accurately. At the Durrell Celebration in >> Alexandria (2007), Penelope Durrell Hope said her mother called PC ?all >> lies.? It surely wasn?t ?all lies,? but I think a whole lot of fibbing was >> going on, presumably in the interest of telling a ?good story.? Yes, if >> Durrell knew there was no fortress! >> at Kurseong but claimed there was, yes, I would object and wonder just >> what he was up to. Keats can get ?stout Cortez? wrong in ?Chapman?s >> Homer,? but no one accuses him of lying. Keats was simply a bad >> historian. Durrell?s ?errors,? if such, are something else again. >> >>> >> >>> Bruce >> >>> >> > >> >> -------------- next part -------------- >> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >> URL: > d30afda1/attachment-0001.html> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Subject: Digest Footer >> >> _______________________________________________ >> ILDS mailing list >> ILDS at lists.uvic.ca >> https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> End of ILDS Digest, Vol 114, Issue 9 >> ************************************ >> > > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bredwine1968 at gmail.com Sun Oct 9 10:33:40 2016 From: bredwine1968 at gmail.com (Bruce Redwine) Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2016 10:33:40 -0700 Subject: [ilds] Comparisons In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Agree. There is no comparison on the personal level. Personal names sometimes get turned into verbs and nouns: Boycott, de Sade, Mesmer. These are famous people who did something notorious or noteworthy. ?Trump? may become synonymous with mendacity and fraudulence. ?Durrell,? on the other hand, may become associated with verbal inventiveness and creativity. No comparison. Bruce > On Oct 9, 2016, at 7:00 AM, Richard Pine wrote: > > Ravi, no-one is comparing Trump and Durrell. But it might be interesting if they did. > RP > > On Sun, Oct 9, 2016 at 8:20 AM, Ravi Nambiar > wrote: > Truth and untruth! Durrell and Trump! I am sorry to say that we are insulting Durrell by comparing Trump with him, or Durrell with Trump. I doubt whether Trump has ever read a poem or a novel. True or false, like it or not, the truth is that there is enough of Americanism in Trump. That is why he gets followers. We enjoy Alexandria Quartet because there is Darley's or Justine's or Melissa's experience (at least partly) in each of us or some of us, the readers. That is the truth and this is what literature is expected to do. We don't have to count the number of times Darley slept with Melissa or Justine with the number of times Durrell slept with any woman, and thus discover truth. We don't enjoy the Quintet because we, as readers, may not have the experience of Affad, like his penetrating in Tantric style and then reflecting, or of his joyful acceptance of death. That is also truth. > Ravi > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pinedurrellcorfu at gmail.com Sun Oct 9 11:06:34 2016 From: pinedurrellcorfu at gmail.com (Richard Pine) Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2016 21:06:34 +0300 Subject: [ilds] Comparisons In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Have you been Trumped? Have you been Durrelled? A nice idea. On Sun, Oct 9, 2016 at 8:33 PM, Bruce Redwine wrote: > Agree. There is no comparison on the personal level. Personal names > sometimes get turned into verbs and nouns: Boycott, de Sade, Mesmer. > These are famous people who did something notorious or noteworthy. ?Trump? > may become synonymous with mendacity and fraudulence. ?Durrell,? on the > other hand, may become associated with verbal inventiveness and > creativity. No comparison. > > Bruce > > > > > > On Oct 9, 2016, at 7:00 AM, Richard Pine > wrote: > > Ravi, no-one is comparing Trump and Durrell. But it might be interesting > if they did. > RP > > On Sun, Oct 9, 2016 at 8:20 AM, Ravi Nambiar wrote: > >> Truth and untruth! Durrell and Trump! I am sorry to say that we are >> insulting Durrell by comparing Trump with him, or Durrell with Trump. I >> doubt whether Trump has ever read a poem or a novel. True or false, like it >> or not, the truth is that there is enough of Americanism in Trump. That is >> why he gets followers. We enjoy *Alexandria Quartet* because there is >> Darley's or Justine's or Melissa's experience (at least partly) in each of >> us or some of us, the readers. That is the truth and this is what >> literature is expected to do. We don't have to count the number of times >> Darley slept with Melissa or Justine with the number of times Durrell slept >> with any woman, and thus discover truth. We don't enjoy the *Quintet* because >> we, as readers, may not have the experience of Affad, like his penetrating >> in Tantric style and then reflecting, or of his joyful acceptance of death. >> That is also truth. >> Ravi >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dtart at bigpond.net.au Sun Oct 9 13:14:08 2016 From: dtart at bigpond.net.au (Denise Tart & David Green) Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2016 07:14:08 +1100 Subject: [ilds] Comparisons In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <08B425B4-D254-4BE7-B276-58B4772AE19D@bigpond.net.au> I'd say I've been Durrelled. As for Trump, he has been well and truly De Niroed. As for those of us in Australia, we have been Turnbulled which, fortunately, doesn't amount to much. David. Sent from my iPad > On 10 Oct 2016, at 5:06 AM, Richard Pine wrote: > > Have you been Trumped? > Have you been Durrelled? > A nice idea. > > On Sun, Oct 9, 2016 at 8:33 PM, Bruce Redwine wrote: >> Agree. There is no comparison on the personal level. Personal names sometimes get turned into verbs and nouns: Boycott, de Sade, Mesmer. These are famous people who did something notorious or noteworthy. ?Trump? may become synonymous with mendacity and fraudulence. ?Durrell,? on the other hand, may become associated with verbal inventiveness and creativity. No comparison. >> >> Bruce >> >> >> >> >> >>> On Oct 9, 2016, at 7:00 AM, Richard Pine wrote: >>> >>> Ravi, no-one is comparing Trump and Durrell. But it might be interesting if they did. >>> RP >>> >>>> On Sun, Oct 9, 2016 at 8:20 AM, Ravi Nambiar wrote: >>>> Truth and untruth! Durrell and Trump! I am sorry to say that we are insulting Durrell by comparing Trump with him, or Durrell with Trump. I doubt whether Trump has ever read a poem or a novel. True or false, like it or not, the truth is that there is enough of Americanism in Trump. That is why he gets followers. We enjoy Alexandria Quartet because there is Darley's or Justine's or Melissa's experience (at least partly) in each of us or some of us, the readers. That is the truth and this is what literature is expected to do. We don't have to count the number of times Darley slept with Melissa or Justine with the number of times Durrell slept with any woman, and thus discover truth. We don't enjoy the Quintet because we, as readers, may not have the experience of Affad, like his penetrating in Tantric style and then reflecting, or of his joyful acceptance of death. That is also truth. >>>> Ravi >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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: From Ric.Wilson at msn.com Sun Oct 9 13:56:38 2016 From: Ric.Wilson at msn.com (Ric Wilson) Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2016 20:56:38 +0000 Subject: [ilds] ILDS Digest, Vol 114, Issue 9 (Ravi Nambiar) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Ravi--Gentlemen "remediate," a term James hammered out (2011), I think. "Durrelled," as point of reference was well received. We arrive at that circumspectly, through lifetimes in clinging-- my Tantric symbolism for penetration --to protect what, an invisible sticker? Justine kissing bruises comes to mind. We halt ourselves from blading one out secondary to acquired realization that there's more harm in store than a knife's still-life simplicity seduces us with. It's a fight against a sticker. An established method for thorn removal , signifying quick-fix , gets called into question. As for "Trumped," ubiquitous points of view here may become elephant in Bill's "fucking idiots," closet. Defending this don [ Portuguese: Dom [d?]) from Latin dominus, (roughly, "Lord") ] as exercise in disgorging one's Americanism calls for more daring, risk. Priam's venture to the tent of his son's killer by night required nerve & diplomacy. Cheers, Ric Wilson ________________________________ From: ILDS on behalf of ilds-request at lists.uvic.ca Sent: Sunday, October 9, 2016 12:01 PM To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca Subject: ILDS Digest, Vol 114, Issue 10 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: ILDS Digest, Vol 114, Issue 9 (Ravi Nambiar) 2. Re: ILDS Digest, Vol 114, Issue 9 (Richard Pine) 3. Comparisons (Bruce Redwine) 4. Re: Comparisons (Richard Pine) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2016 10:50:48 +0530 From: Ravi Nambiar To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca Subject: Re: [ilds] ILDS Digest, Vol 114, Issue 9 Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Truth and untruth! Durrell and Trump! I am sorry to say that we are insulting Durrell by comparing Trump with him, or Durrell with Trump. I doubt whether Trump has ever read a poem or a novel. True or false, like it or not, the truth is that there is enough of Americanism in Trump. That is why he gets followers. We enjoy *Alexandria Quartet* because there is Darley's or Justine's or Melissa's experience (at least partly) in each of us or some of us, the readers. That is the truth and this is what literature is expected to do. We don't have to count the number of times Darley slept with Melissa or Justine with the number of times Durrell slept with any woman, and thus discover truth. We don't enjoy the *Quintet* because we, as readers, may not have the experience of Affad, like his penetrating in Tantric style and then reflecting, or of his joyful acceptance of death. That is also truth. Ravi On Sun, Oct 9, 2016 at 12:30 AM, wrote: > 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: Truth (Bruce Redwine) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2016 11:16:23 -0700 > From: Bruce Redwine > To: Sumantra Nag > Cc: Bruce Redwine > Subject: Re: [ilds] Truth > Message-ID: <4F29EE36-54FF-4771-B812-8E820C291170 at earthlink.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > Here we differ. I would say major parts of Durrell?s oeuvre are a > justification or advocacy of a way of life. In their letters, Durrell and > Miller call themselves religious writers. I don?t take this to mean > ?religious? in the sense of Milton?s to "justify the ways of God to men,? > rather ?religious" as a way of life. Way as Tao. (Remember, Durrell > called himself a Taoist.) And what is religion if not a way of believing > and living? As to self-deception, the self as ?selective fictions? speaks > for itself. > > Bruce > > > > On Oct 6, 2016, at 11:45 PM, Richard Pine > wrote: > > > > I don't think LD tried to justify anything, except the importance of > being a good writer. As for self-deception, it is part of the selected > fictions by which we all live, and I know nothing of amorality even though > I live amidst it and probably reek of it myself. If you believe that the > meek shall inherit the earth, you will believe anything. Hence Trump. His > candidacy is the prime example of a jeu that has gone terribly wrong (the > American jeu - not Trump's, since Trump's jeu is going terribly well) > > RP > > > > On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 3:42 AM, Bruce Redwine < > bredwine1968 at earthlink.net > wrote: > > Richard, you?re right. Let?s put this discussion in perspective. Trump > is a lying would-be politician who could do immense harm if elected, > whereas Durrell was a poet and storyteller who lied on occasion and harmed > no one (beyond close relations). So there is no comparison in that sense. > I am bothered, however, by Durrell?s personal philosophy, so far as it > advocates or justifies a kind of amorality and self-deception. That aspect > of his art and behavior seems to me false. I am not prepared to say that I > admire him ?so long as he was a poet and told a good story.? That is, no > matter what his faults I support him. This debate stretches far back. > Plato doesn?t like poets and wants to ban them from his ideal state. > That?s absurd. But Plato believed in truth, and I can see his concerns. > So let?s leave it at that. All errors are mine, as writers like to say. > > > > Bruce > > > > > > > > > > > >> On Oct 6, 2016, at 1:41 PM, Richard Pine > wrote: > >> > >> Let's stick with Trump. maybe, as President, he will follow Sarkozy's > lead and be photographed allegedly reading the Alexandria Quartet. If so, > his minders will have scored a major p r triumph and told one of the > biggest lies of his career. It is a fact (let's not call it a 'truth') that > Trump is within an ass's roar of the White House, even though he is a liar, > a cheat, a racist, a philanderer, a sexist, a draft-dodger, and an > appallingly bad businessman. Trump is a success because, altho he himself > is a fiction, people believe him: he is capitalising on Kurt Schumacher?s > 1932 observation, that the best way to appeal to people?s anger is > ?ceaselessly mobilising human stupidity? That's an American truth. Canada > isn't much better with Truth-dough in power. > >> It doesn't matter to me one little bit that LD, who was almost never in > any degree powerful in that sense, told lies, bent the truth, borrowed > unashamedly from others' work, misrepresented his personal circumstances, > or was a sexist or philanderer SO LONG AS HE WAS A POET AND TOLD A GOOD > STORY. Trump matters because his credible story appeals to American > readership. Durrell doesn't matter because his story cannot hurt people. > >> He was absolutely right when he said we live lives based on selected > fictions. There are two kinds - those that are selected for us, and those > that we ourselves select. Almost all his work involves these two types of > fiction. And we respond to it because it tells us some 'truth' about > ourselves. Truth, if you pursue it long and hard enough, proves itself to > be a fiction. > >> RP > >> > >> On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 11:13 PM, Bruce Redwine < > bredwine1968 at earthlink.net > wrote: > >> Truth matters. And it particularly matters, as you point out, during > an election year in the U.S. when Mr. Donald J. Trump, presidential > candidate, is a habitual and egregious liar. That fact may be a context > for this discussion. It is one thing, as John Keats does, to get a > particular fact wrong, but quite another when Lawrence Durrell, who surely > knows his facts, prefers to indulge in ?selective fictions.? White lies or > societal niceties, which we all commit, are no excuse for > misrepresentations of a higher order. Durrell?s ?selective fictions? > licenses too much at times, particularly with reference to his art and > self-portrayal. Relativity does not justify dishonesty. I call plagiarism > an example of dishonesty?and there are many examples of that in Durrell?s > oeuvre, which we have discussed over the years. > >> > >> Re ?Le cercle referm?,? what would you call a last poem at the end of a > poet?s last work, one that recapitulates the poet?s life and describes a > final closing and ?last goodbye?? I?d call it a summa, autobiographical > closure. To suggest that it?s fiction undercuts the poem?s poignancy. > Granted that the first two lines are a problem?Durrell was never in > Benares?but even that ?fiction? serves as an example of Durrell?s life. > So, I smile at that bit of ?selective fiction,? but I?ll give him that as > he leaves the stage. Othello does the same thing at the end of > Shakespeare?s play. His tale of the ?base Indian? who ?threw a pearl away? > distorts and misrepresents what he did to Desdemona. Her horrible death is > draped in metaphors. But the speech also illustrates a life full of > dazzling diction. Othello?s speech is a beautiful artifact, and Durrell?s > final poem is equally beautiful, obscure and allusive, true to its maker. > >> > >> Bruce > >> > >> > >>> On Oct 6, 2016, at 12:16 AM, Richard Pine > wrote: > >>> > >>> I have reached the point in life, in lying, in reading and writing > when "truth" has ceased to matter. Electing Trump (if it happens) will be a > lie, but it will also be a verifiable fact - i.e truth. Every day every one > of us tells lies, but they are societal lies, as in "Hello how are you?" > "Fine thanks. And you?" "Great". Not "Not so good, my wife just ran off > with my best friend and my son was jailed for selling cocaine". We obscure, > fudge, conceal, obfuscate so as to present an image.The best possible image > that society wants to see. The best possible story that the reader wants to > read. > >>> If I decline a dinner invitation on the grounds of too much work, when > in 'truth' I just don't want to spend an evening with that person and their > guests, am I telling a lie? And if so, a white lie, a black lie or a grey > lie? And so what? It was a necessary lie in order to protect myself > against boredom. > >>> LD was in his personal life (if there was such a thing) a man > incapable - like all of us - of telling the truth. He was in search of > himself and he would tell any lies necessary, and push aside all > unnecessary truths, to get at that self. You say that PC may not be 'all > lies' - so which bits are not lies? And which bits that are 'truthful' are > really truthful, or just partially truthful? C'mon. > >>> How can any truth-oriented person read MFOA, knowing that it is one > monstrous lie but a damn good story? A principled reader will refuse to > read it. And the Bible. And the Sermon on the Mount (both Jesus's and > Caradoc's, although Caradoc's was more truthful) > >>> I share the LD view - that it just doesn't matter. And why do you call > 'Le cercle referme' an 'autobiographical poem'? What 'proof' have you that > it was intended as such? No, mere readerly, critical supposition. If I said > that, in calling it that, you were lying, you would, rightly, take offence. > >>> Keats? He was a POET! but you excuse him because he was 'a bad > historian' - i.e., he can't be blamed because he didn't tell a lie, just he > didn't get the truth that historians would insist on. But if Durrell makes > the same mistake, deliberately, he is, apparently, to blame. A liar. Oh > dear, you must be a very virtuous person Bruce. And virtue is.....virtual > truth, not real truth. ha ha > >>> RP > >>> > >>> On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 12:11 AM, Bruce Redwine < > bredwine1968 at earthlink.net > wrote: > >>> Richard, I think we?re back to discussing Durrell?s notion of > ?Truth.? (Which differs from mine.) So we have another kind of ?le cercle > referm?.? You?re undoubtedly right that Durrell was chiefly a poet and a > storyteller, but I have great trouble when he presents (disguises?) certain > works as ?fact? (e.g., Prospero?s Cell or his autobiographical poem, ?Le > cercle referm??) and then proceeds to embellish and distort. Was he aware > of what he was doing? Dunno. If he was aware, isn?t that the definition > of lying? Does it matter? Maybe not to many people but to me it does. In > Haag?s City of Memory, Yvette Cohen said (more than less) that Durrell > couldn?t be trusted to report accurately. At the Durrell Celebration in > Alexandria (2007), Penelope Durrell Hope said her mother called PC ?all > lies.? It surely wasn?t ?all lies,? but I think a whole lot of fibbing was > going on, presumably in the interest of telling a ?good story.? Yes, if > Durrell knew there was no fortress! > at Kurseong but claimed there was, yes, I would object and wonder just > what he was up to. Keats can get ?stout Cortez? wrong in ?Chapman?s > Homer,? but no one accuses him of lying. Keats was simply a bad > historian. Durrell?s ?errors,? if such, are something else again. > >>> > >>> Bruce > >>> > > > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: 20161007/d30afda1/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Subject: Digest Footer > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > > ------------------------------ > > End of ILDS Digest, Vol 114, Issue 9 > ************************************ > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2016 17:00:30 +0300 From: Richard Pine To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca, cnncravi at gmail.com Subject: Re: [ilds] ILDS Digest, Vol 114, Issue 9 Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Ravi, no-one is comparing Trump and Durrell. But it might be interesting if they did. RP On Sun, Oct 9, 2016 at 8:20 AM, Ravi Nambiar wrote: > Truth and untruth! Durrell and Trump! I am sorry to say that we are > insulting Durrell by comparing Trump with him, or Durrell with Trump. I > doubt whether Trump has ever read a poem or a novel. True or false, like it > or not, the truth is that there is enough of Americanism in Trump. That is > why he gets followers. We enjoy *Alexandria Quartet* because there is > Darley's or Justine's or Melissa's experience (at least partly) in each of > us or some of us, the readers. That is the truth and this is what > literature is expected to do. We don't have to count the number of times > Darley slept with Melissa or Justine with the number of times Durrell slept > with any woman, and thus discover truth. We don't enjoy the *Quintet* because > we, as readers, may not have the experience of Affad, like his penetrating > in Tantric style and then reflecting, or of his joyful acceptance of death. > That is also truth. > Ravi > > On Sun, Oct 9, 2016 at 12:30 AM, wrote: > >> 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: Truth (Bruce Redwine) >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Message: 1 >> Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2016 11:16:23 -0700 >> From: Bruce Redwine >> To: Sumantra Nag >> Cc: Bruce Redwine >> Subject: Re: [ilds] Truth >> Message-ID: <4F29EE36-54FF-4771-B812-8E820C291170 at earthlink.net> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" >> >> Here we differ. I would say major parts of Durrell?s oeuvre are a >> justification or advocacy of a way of life. In their letters, Durrell and >> Miller call themselves religious writers. I don?t take this to mean >> ?religious? in the sense of Milton?s to "justify the ways of God to men,? >> rather ?religious" as a way of life. Way as Tao. (Remember, Durrell >> called himself a Taoist.) And what is religion if not a way of believing >> and living? As to self-deception, the self as ?selective fictions? speaks >> for itself. >> >> Bruce >> >> >> > On Oct 6, 2016, at 11:45 PM, Richard Pine >> wrote: >> > >> > I don't think LD tried to justify anything, except the importance of >> being a good writer. As for self-deception, it is part of the selected >> fictions by which we all live, and I know nothing of amorality even though >> I live amidst it and probably reek of it myself. If you believe that the >> meek shall inherit the earth, you will believe anything. Hence Trump. His >> candidacy is the prime example of a jeu that has gone terribly wrong (the >> American jeu - not Trump's, since Trump's jeu is going terribly well) >> > RP >> > >> > On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 3:42 AM, Bruce Redwine < >> bredwine1968 at earthlink.net > wrote: >> > Richard, you?re right. Let?s put this discussion in perspective. >> Trump is a lying would-be politician who could do immense harm if elected, >> whereas Durrell was a poet and storyteller who lied on occasion and harmed >> no one (beyond close relations). So there is no comparison in that sense. >> I am bothered, however, by Durrell?s personal philosophy, so far as it >> advocates or justifies a kind of amorality and self-deception. That aspect >> of his art and behavior seems to me false. I am not prepared to say that I >> admire him ?so long as he was a poet and told a good story.? That is, no >> matter what his faults I support him. This debate stretches far back. >> Plato doesn?t like poets and wants to ban them from his ideal state. >> That?s absurd. But Plato believed in truth, and I can see his concerns. >> So let?s leave it at that. All errors are mine, as writers like to say. >> > >> > Bruce >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >> On Oct 6, 2016, at 1:41 PM, Richard Pine > > wrote: >> >> >> >> Let's stick with Trump. maybe, as President, he will follow Sarkozy's >> lead and be photographed allegedly reading the Alexandria Quartet. If so, >> his minders will have scored a major p r triumph and told one of the >> biggest lies of his career. It is a fact (let's not call it a 'truth') that >> Trump is within an ass's roar of the White House, even though he is a liar, >> a cheat, a racist, a philanderer, a sexist, a draft-dodger, and an >> appallingly bad businessman. Trump is a success because, altho he himself >> is a fiction, people believe him: he is capitalising on Kurt Schumacher?s >> 1932 observation, that the best way to appeal to people?s anger is >> ?ceaselessly mobilising human stupidity? That's an American truth. Canada >> isn't much better with Truth-dough in power. >> >> It doesn't matter to me one little bit that LD, who was almost never >> in any degree powerful in that sense, told lies, bent the truth, borrowed >> unashamedly from others' work, misrepresented his personal circumstances, >> or was a sexist or philanderer SO LONG AS HE WAS A POET AND TOLD A GOOD >> STORY. Trump matters because his credible story appeals to American >> readership. Durrell doesn't matter because his story cannot hurt people. >> >> He was absolutely right when he said we live lives based on selected >> fictions. There are two kinds - those that are selected for us, and those >> that we ourselves select. Almost all his work involves these two types of >> fiction. And we respond to it because it tells us some 'truth' about >> ourselves. Truth, if you pursue it long and hard enough, proves itself to >> be a fiction. >> >> RP >> >> >> >> On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 11:13 PM, Bruce Redwine < >> bredwine1968 at earthlink.net > wrote: >> >> Truth matters. And it particularly matters, as you point out, during >> an election year in the U.S. when Mr. Donald J. Trump, presidential >> candidate, is a habitual and egregious liar. That fact may be a context >> for this discussion. It is one thing, as John Keats does, to get a >> particular fact wrong, but quite another when Lawrence Durrell, who surely >> knows his facts, prefers to indulge in ?selective fictions.? White lies or >> societal niceties, which we all commit, are no excuse for >> misrepresentations of a higher order. Durrell?s ?selective fictions? >> licenses too much at times, particularly with reference to his art and >> self-portrayal. Relativity does not justify dishonesty. I call plagiarism >> an example of dishonesty?and there are many examples of that in Durrell?s >> oeuvre, which we have discussed over the years. >> >> >> >> Re ?Le cercle referm?,? what would you call a last poem at the end of >> a poet?s last work, one that recapitulates the poet?s life and describes a >> final closing and ?last goodbye?? I?d call it a summa, autobiographical >> closure. To suggest that it?s fiction undercuts the poem?s poignancy. >> Granted that the first two lines are a problem?Durrell was never in >> Benares?but even that ?fiction? serves as an example of Durrell?s life. >> So, I smile at that bit of ?selective fiction,? but I?ll give him that as >> he leaves the stage. Othello does the same thing at the end of >> Shakespeare?s play. His tale of the ?base Indian? who ?threw a pearl away? >> distorts and misrepresents what he did to Desdemona. Her horrible death is >> draped in metaphors. But the speech also illustrates a life full of >> dazzling diction. Othello?s speech is a beautiful artifact, and Durrell?s >> final poem is equally beautiful, obscure and allusive, true to its maker. >> >> >> >> Bruce >> >> >> >> >> >>> On Oct 6, 2016, at 12:16 AM, Richard Pine > > wrote: >> >>> >> >>> I have reached the point in life, in lying, in reading and writing >> when "truth" has ceased to matter. Electing Trump (if it happens) will be a >> lie, but it will also be a verifiable fact - i.e truth. Every day every one >> of us tells lies, but they are societal lies, as in "Hello how are you?" >> "Fine thanks. And you?" "Great". Not "Not so good, my wife just ran off >> with my best friend and my son was jailed for selling cocaine". We obscure, >> fudge, conceal, obfuscate so as to present an image.The best possible image >> that society wants to see. The best possible story that the reader wants to >> read. >> >>> If I decline a dinner invitation on the grounds of too much work, >> when in 'truth' I just don't want to spend an evening with that person and >> their guests, am I telling a lie? And if so, a white lie, a black lie or a >> grey lie? And so what? It was a necessary lie in order to protect myself >> against boredom. >> >>> LD was in his personal life (if there was such a thing) a man >> incapable - like all of us - of telling the truth. He was in search of >> himself and he would tell any lies necessary, and push aside all >> unnecessary truths, to get at that self. You say that PC may not be 'all >> lies' - so which bits are not lies? And which bits that are 'truthful' are >> really truthful, or just partially truthful? C'mon. >> >>> How can any truth-oriented person read MFOA, knowing that it is one >> monstrous lie but a damn good story? A principled reader will refuse to >> read it. And the Bible. And the Sermon on the Mount (both Jesus's and >> Caradoc's, although Caradoc's was more truthful) >> >>> I share the LD view - that it just doesn't matter. And why do you >> call 'Le cercle referme' an 'autobiographical poem'? What 'proof' have you >> that it was intended as such? No, mere readerly, critical supposition. If I >> said that, in calling it that, you were lying, you would, rightly, take >> offence. >> >>> Keats? He was a POET! but you excuse him because he was 'a bad >> historian' - i.e., he can't be blamed because he didn't tell a lie, just he >> didn't get the truth that historians would insist on. But if Durrell makes >> the same mistake, deliberately, he is, apparently, to blame. A liar. Oh >> dear, you must be a very virtuous person Bruce. And virtue is.....virtual >> truth, not real truth. ha ha >> >>> RP >> >>> >> >>> On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 12:11 AM, Bruce Redwine < >> bredwine1968 at earthlink.net > wrote: >> >>> Richard, I think we?re back to discussing Durrell?s notion of >> ?Truth.? (Which differs from mine.) So we have another kind of ?le cercle >> referm?.? You?re undoubtedly right that Durrell was chiefly a poet and a >> storyteller, but I have great trouble when he presents (disguises?) certain >> works as ?fact? (e.g., Prospero?s Cell or his autobiographical poem, ?Le >> cercle referm??) and then proceeds to embellish and distort. Was he aware >> of what he was doing? Dunno. If he was aware, isn?t that the definition >> of lying? Does it matter? Maybe not to many people but to me it does. In >> Haag?s City of Memory, Yvette Cohen said (more than less) that Durrell >> couldn?t be trusted to report accurately. At the Durrell Celebration in >> Alexandria (2007), Penelope Durrell Hope said her mother called PC ?all >> lies.? It surely wasn?t ?all lies,? but I think a whole lot of fibbing was >> going on, presumably in the interest of telling a ?good story.? Yes, if >> Durrell knew there was no fortress! >> at Kurseong but claimed there was, yes, I would object and wonder just >> what he was up to. Keats can get ?stout Cortez? wrong in ?Chapman?s >> Homer,? but no one accuses him of lying. Keats was simply a bad >> historian. Durrell?s ?errors,? if such, are something else again. >> >>> >> >>> Bruce >> >>> >> > >> >> -------------- next part -------------- >> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >> URL: > d30afda1/attachment-0001.html> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Subject: Digest Footer >> >> _______________________________________________ >> ILDS mailing list >> ILDS at lists.uvic.ca >> https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> End of ILDS Digest, Vol 114, Issue 9 >> ************************************ >> > > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2016 10:33:40 -0700 From: Bruce Redwine To: Sumantra Nag Cc: Bruce Redwine Subject: [ilds] Comparisons Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Agree. There is no comparison on the personal level. Personal names sometimes get turned into verbs and nouns: Boycott, de Sade, Mesmer. These are famous people who did something notorious or noteworthy. ?Trump? may become synonymous with mendacity and fraudulence. ?Durrell,? on the other hand, may become associated with verbal inventiveness and creativity. No comparison. Bruce > On Oct 9, 2016, at 7:00 AM, Richard Pine wrote: > > Ravi, no-one is comparing Trump and Durrell. But it might be interesting if they did. > RP > > On Sun, Oct 9, 2016 at 8:20 AM, Ravi Nambiar > wrote: > Truth and untruth! Durrell and Trump! I am sorry to say that we are insulting Durrell by comparing Trump with him, or Durrell with Trump. I doubt whether Trump has ever read a poem or a novel. True or false, like it or not, the truth is that there is enough of Americanism in Trump. That is why he gets followers. We enjoy Alexandria Quartet because there is Darley's or Justine's or Melissa's experience (at least partly) in each of us or some of us, the readers. That is the truth and this is what literature is expected to do. We don't have to count the number of times Darley slept with Melissa or Justine with the number of times Durrell slept with any woman, and thus discover truth. We don't enjoy the Quintet because we, as readers, may not have the experience of Affad, like his penetrating in Tantric style and then reflecting, or of his joyful acceptance of death. That is also truth. > Ravi > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2016 21:06:34 +0300 From: Richard Pine To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca Subject: Re: [ilds] Comparisons Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Have you been Trumped? Have you been Durrelled? A nice idea. On Sun, Oct 9, 2016 at 8:33 PM, Bruce Redwine wrote: > Agree. There is no comparison on the personal level. Personal names > sometimes get turned into verbs and nouns: Boycott, de Sade, Mesmer. > These are famous people who did something notorious or noteworthy. ?Trump? > may become synonymous with mendacity and fraudulence. ?Durrell,? on the > other hand, may become associated with verbal inventiveness and > creativity. No comparison. > > Bruce > > > > > > On Oct 9, 2016, at 7:00 AM, Richard Pine > wrote: > > Ravi, no-one is comparing Trump and Durrell. But it might be interesting > if they did. > RP > > On Sun, Oct 9, 2016 at 8:20 AM, Ravi Nambiar wrote: > >> Truth and untruth! Durrell and Trump! I am sorry to say that we are >> insulting Durrell by comparing Trump with him, or Durrell with Trump. I >> doubt whether Trump has ever read a poem or a novel. True or false, like it >> or not, the truth is that there is enough of Americanism in Trump. That is >> why he gets followers. We enjoy *Alexandria Quartet* because there is >> Darley's or Justine's or Melissa's experience (at least partly) in each of >> us or some of us, the readers. That is the truth and this is what >> literature is expected to do. We don't have to count the number of times >> Darley slept with Melissa or Justine with the number of times Durrell slept >> with any woman, and thus discover truth. We don't enjoy the *Quintet* because >> we, as readers, may not have the experience of Affad, like his penetrating >> in Tantric style and then reflecting, or of his joyful acceptance of death. >> That is also truth. >> Ravi >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > 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://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds ------------------------------ End of ILDS Digest, Vol 114, Issue 10 ************************************* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: