[ilds] ILDS Digest, Vol 114, Issue 9

Ravi Nambiar cnncravi at gmail.com
Sat Oct 8 22:20:48 PDT 2016


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, <ilds-request at lists.uvic.ca> 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 <bredwine1968 at earthlink.net>
> To: Sumantra Nag <ilds at lists.uvic.ca>
> Cc: Bruce Redwine <bredwine1968 at earthlink.net>
> 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 <pinedurrellcorfu at gmail.com>
> 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 <mailto: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 <pinedurrellcorfu at gmail.com
> <mailto:pinedurrellcorfu at gmail.com>> 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 <mailto: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 <pinedurrellcorfu at gmail.com
> <mailto:pinedurrellcorfu at gmail.com>> 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 <mailto: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: <http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/
> 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: <http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20161009/0c429c8b/attachment.html>


More information about the ILDS mailing list