Not
everything worth reading is hot off the press. In this section, we recommend "something old" that is still well worth
reading. "Something Old" can mean anything from a venerable and antique
classic to a good book first published four or more years ago.
“MY LIVES” by Francis Meynell
(first published in 1971)
It
is rare to read a book whose author clearly, egregiously and unwittingly
reveals himself to be a completely insensitive ass. I am about to introduce you
to a book which you will never read, written by someone of no particular
interest to you. Years ago, in the days when I used to trawl second-hand
bookshops, I would sometimes look out for books that might be of interest to my
old friend and neighbour (now long dead) the craft printer Ronald Holloway. The
name Meynell on the cover of one such book drew my attention, as I associated
the name with printing. So after I had scanned the blurb, I bought the book
with the intention of handing it on to Ron – which I eventually did.
But
first I read it myself.
In
some places I had to restrain my incredulous laughter. In others I gasped at
the self-satisfied pomposity of the author.
Let
me orient you to the book.
My Lives is an autobiography written by an octogenarian.
Francis Meynell was born in 1891, the youngest child of the Catholic poets and
publishers Wilfred and Alice Meynell. Viola Meynell, the short-story writer and
poet, was among his older siblings.
Francis Meynell himself rapidly became an agnostic. He was three times
married and twice divorced. His second wife, Vera, killed herself a few years
after their separation. He stayed with his third wife, “Bay” (Alix Kilroy), for
the last 40 or so years of his life. His big achievement (I might almost say
his only achievement) was founding the Nonesuch Press in the early 1920s – a
press devoted to producing upmarket editions of out-of-the-way English
classics. (A sound – if somewhat battered – Nonesuch edition of John Donne sits
on my shelves.) Francis Meynell also had some fame, in specialist circles, as a
typographer and designer.
In
the 1930s he left the floundering Nonesuch Press and proceeded to have what I
would regard as a very standard and unsurprising career for one of his
privileged background and family connections. He was a film publicist in the
1930s. He worked for government departments concerned with rationing and
consumer advice during the war. He was involved in a concrete and cement
company in the 1940s and 1950s and he again dabbled in publishing when somebody
revived the Nonesuch Press. He tells us of all his changes of address, all the
boards he served on, all the design advice he tendered to His or Her Majesty’s
Stationery Office, the clubs he belonged to and his third wife’s distinguished
career in the civil service. He was knighted. She was damed.
In
and of itself, this life story is bland and uninteresting. Meynell claims he
chose the title My Lives because he
had held so many and such varied positions and hence lived many different
“lives”. But there is no sense of the inner, and extremely self-satisfied, core
of the man having ever changed; or of experience ever teaching him to modify
his views.
At
a certain point, I began to read My Lives
as an exercise in diagnosing the pathologies of autobiography.
First,
there are the standard woes of so many autobiographies.
As
so often in autobiography, the story beconmes duller and duller as childhood
and youth are put behind. Why is this? Possibly because, as public life takes
over, the autobiographer feels
constrained to “do justice” to all people known, to colleagues, personalities
and work. As a result, the person disappears. In this case the story becomes a
graceless succession of anecdotes told in the office or at dinner parties.
Distinguished names are dropped but I suggest that so often the autobiographer
would have been the least interesting person in any gathering of “names”. This is autobiography-as-memorandum. Nearly
everybody mentioned is mentioned favourably (except for the dead) so that,
presumably, they will think the autobiographer is an awfully decent fellow.
Worse, as he gets old the autobiographer “reluctantly” quotes wonderful
testimonials to his work by other people – tributes which he is, of course, shy
to give us but which he gives anyway. Yes, Meynell is right in his concluding
pages when he says that all autobiography is a form of boasting. But his form
of boasting is transparent, kittenish and embarrassing. Let a boast be an
honest boast! Pretending to be a gentleman of modesty simply makes it worse.
Second,
there is the very unlovely character of Francis Meynell himself, which
he unwittingly lets us see so often.
Sure,
there is the occasional gentlemanly witticism, as in: “In my long life I have never been the worse for liquor – and sometimes
the better.” (p.60)
Yes,
there are some familiar and famous anecdotes – which have been recorded by
other writers – as in : “I often went
with my sisters to more intimate dances, such as H.G.Wells gave in Church Row,
Hampstead. There we had the fun of seeing Henry James surveying the scene from
the sidelines – stout, formal and with his sentences prepared for the intervals
but often cut short in mid-utterance by the resumption of the music. Once he
stooped to restore a fan dropped by my sister Olivia. ‘An elephant striving to
pick up a pea’, said H.G.” (p.69) [I wonder about the veracity of the
punchline here, given that other writers have recorded H.G.Wells as saying that
Henry James’ prose-style was like “a
hippopotamus rolling a pea.”]
Yes,
there is one very good childhood anecdote exposing class prejudices: “[My mother] was awakened by screams, a woman’s screams, which dwindled away down
the street. She hastened to report this incident at the police station. And the
reply? ‘No need to worry, lady; that wasn’t a woman, that was
only a female’ (i.e. a prostitute).” (p.78)
There
is plenty of evidence that Meynell was a callous and self-absorbed man.
Consider
the moral worth of a man who, on the same page that he tells us his second wife
committed suicide, tells us that he approved of her action because he is, after
all, a member of the Euthanasia Society.
“It was and is my view that one has an
absolute right to end one’s life when one wants to. (That is why I am a life
member – or should it be a death member? – of the Euthanasia Society).”
(p.286)
Of
course, he claims, he remained awfully decent pals with his ex-wives, and of
course he accepts no responsibility for the break-ups. There is one laughable
passage in which he claims (p.206) that moving from one house to another had a
bad effect on both his first and second marriages and tells us that “In the fashion of our time and neighbourhood
and friends, we enjoyed plentifully what is now called the ‘permissive’
attitude towards extra-marital affairs.” But he fails to admit any
connection between infidelity and the fragility of his marriages. As always in
the autobiographies of the much-married, many intimate details are suppressed;
but you can’t help noticing how he has to tell us that, between marriages, he
was much loved. Why, one woman even wrote a poem to him…
Then
there is his complete unawareness of his own snobbery and smugness. Continually, he asks us to admire his
radicalism. From the comfort of England, he enthusiastically supported the
Bolshevik Revolution in 1917 – and of course he claims that the USSR would have
developed splendidly if only the Western powers hadn’t intervened. He opposed
Franco in the Spanish Civil War – why, he and his wife even made up rude
Christmas cards about Franco to send to their friends!! And wasn’t that
McCarthyite period in America dreadful. Gosh! If he hadn’t got somebody at the
embassy to pull strings for him, his visa might have been revoked!!! Of course
he was a socialist, but when he was offered a knighthood for his bureaucratic
services during the war, he couldn’t very well turn it down, could he? I mean,
even nasty Winston Churchill the Home Secretary became wonderful Winston
Churchill the nation’s saviour during the Second World War. And in the midst of
this we have casual reference to servants and weekend homes and proof of how
“democratic” Francis Meynell was. When he had to move out of London, he
actually resigned from the more snobbish of the two London clubs to which he
belonged!!!
“Am I a snob? Honestly, no – not since my
childhood, despite an obvious enjoyment in name-dropping. And I have one piece
of evidence to offer. When I retired to the country and the distance as well as
the lessened income made my membership of two London clubs nonsensical, it was
from the august and regnant Athenaeum, and not from the familiar Savile, that I
chose to resign.” (p.248)
In
all this, I smell the Clubland Rebel – safe and comfy and never sacrificing a
thing while pretending to be a radical. Even more, I smell the Privileged
Rebel. Meynell is at one with the loonier of the Mitfords and the loonier of
the Redgraves – privileged twits whose main reason for adopting a radical pose
is that they don’t like those smelly middle classes below them. So up the
workers (whom they can romanticise but whom they never have to actually meet.)
I
find one sentence in My Lives the
epitome of this snobbish and callous man’s shallowness. He tells us that in the
1950s he helped to bring out a limited edition of the old Anglican Authorised
Version of the Bible (the superseded 17th century translation that
Americans took to calling the King James Bible). He remarks: “This was just before the invasion of the new
chitter-chatter translations: we used of course the lovely Authorised Version,
the literary value of which is for me so much more important than its theology.”
(p.312)
Ah
yes! Sweet euphonious literature – but let’s forget what it is saying or
teaching. It might shake our complacency, after all.
No comments:
Post a Comment