-->

Monday, July 5, 2021

Something Old

 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.  

ALL YOU NEED KNOW ABOUT THE NOVELS OF DAVID LODGE – PART ONE

Dear Reader, I’m sorry, but I did warn you that this was coming when, in my last posting, I reviewed David Lodge’s autobiographies Quite a Good Time To Be Born and Writer’s Luck. I noted that, having consumed his autobiographies, over the summer season I read my way methodically through all fifteen of Lodge’s novels, only a few of which I had read before. I also said that I would present a three-part series commenting on them all. And here for your edification the series begins.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

David Lodge’s first novel was The Picturegoers, published in 1960 when he was 25. But in a detailed introduction to a 1993 reprint of the novel, Lodge notes that he’d begun writing it when he was 21 and finished it long before a publisher picked it up. He also says it is very much a young man’s novel, rather too eager to explain things at length and get lost in side-issues. This is true, but even so, The Picturegoers is a very competent novel and nothing for the older novelist to be ashamed of. I also have to note that it is a novel more seriously immersed in Catholicism than his later, and often more satirical, views of religion are.

It is structured as a series of vignettes of various people who go regularly to the cinema. The seedy old picture palace, the Palladium, is depicted vividly in all its tattiness and the novel makes it clear that even in 1960, picture-going was declining under the impact of television. Even so, Lodge implicitly equates the picture-going habit with religion and church-going – another form of escaping from everyday reality, perhaps.

The first half of the novel has people reacting to the screening of a Hollywood sex-farce (though given a different name, it sounds like the Marilyn Monroe vehicle Seven Year Itch). This evokes different reactions from different members of the audience. It stirs up the thuggish teddy-boy Harry to violent sex fantasies, which he later tries to act out. It makes the older married man nostalgic for the livelier sex he had with his wife when they were younger. And the local Catholic priest Father Kipling – who sees the lascivious film by accident – is so outraged that he tries to set up a “crusade” to stop people going to the movies. (The “crusade” is a flop and even Father Kipling’s bishop advises him to give it up.)

In the second half, the desperate theatre manager tries to woo back his diminishing audience by screening something different – the classic neo-realist Italian film Bicycle Thieves. But this is too much like reality, and the audiences aren’t impressed. Unwillingly, he ends up attracting a teenage audience by screening Rock Around the Clock, which has the kids jiving in the aisles, much to his disgust. Movie-going is still declining, just like church-going.

Inasmuch as it has a main character, it is the young intellectual Mark Underwood who, as Lodge’s introduction suggests, draws very much on aspects of Lodge’s own life. He’s a Catholic who has lapsed a bit, but who is bucked up by lodging with a lively and welcoming lower-middle-class Irish Catholic family, the Mallory family, and he falls in love with the eldest Mallory girl, Clare. She clearly expects this to lead to marriage. She had tried a vocation as a nun, but had given it up and left the convent before she took her final vows. Why did she leave? This dangles as a question until late in the novel when she explains to Mark that another postulant, Hilda, had what amounted to a lesbian crush on Clare, which might have caused a scandal. (Given that the novel was published 60-plus years ago, this is explained very discreetly.) Later, to extend the movies-religion equation, Lodge had poor neurotic Hilda having transferred her adoration from religion to the cult of James Dean.

As always, Lodge presents very accurately the customs and observances of pre-Vatican II Catholics. But (and here I am giving a big spoiler, as I am allowed to do what dealing with older novels) I find very implausible the eventual “conversion” of Mark Underwood, which has him leaving Clare and going off to try a vocation as a priest. This simply does not square with the character who is presented to us for most of the novel. Again in his 1993 Introduction, Lodge says he now thinks this was an artificial conclusion, too influenced by all the Catholic novelists he’d been reading (Bernanos, Mauriac, Greene etc.). And yes, Mark does spend many pages solilioquising and agonising over the bleeding obvious.

Lodge’s second novel Ginger, You’re Barmy (first published in 1962) was his reaction to the two years of compulsory National Service he had to do in the army in the mid-1950s. Jonathan Browne and Mike Brady are fresh out of university. Middle-class and English, Jonathan has done well academically and is looking to get his national service over with, so that he can move into the world of academe. He plans to play along with the military system, much as he hates it. Mike Brady didn’t do well at university but also wants to get his national service over with. Irish and working-class, Mike has a rebellious streak and chooses to take the system on, rather than conforming to it. This leads to big trouble. Despite its jocular title, Ginger, You’re Barmy is not the sort of comic novel that Lodge later made his forte. Indeed much of it reads like dour documentary, doubtless worked up from notes Lodge made during his two years of military servitude. Those in authority – especially the corporals and other NCOs – are bullying to national service recruits. Squaddies are forced to do pointless duties. Parading and drill lead nowhere. There is a clear class structure, with the higher-ups and Regulars mainly coming from private schools or Oxbridge, and following a family military tradition. The food is generally disgusting. Punishments are severe. Most of the working-class recruits are spectacularly foul-mouthed. In his autobiography, Lodge notes that he euphemised most of the swearing in the first edition of this novel, using “fugg” instead of “fuck”. For a second edition years later, he reinstated “fuck” and “c—t” in all their glory – but then he had doubts about this and in the most recent edition he returned to the euphemised language, saying it was more appropriate to novels of the era when it was first published.

It is very easy to bracket Ginger, You’re Barmy with the “angry young men” British novels of the 1950s and early 1960s, written by Alan Sillitoe, John Braine, John Wain and their ilk. Like the “angries”, it is written in the style of realistic reportage and it attacks social castes and their elaborate rituals. It is a protest against young men having to give up two years of their life at a time when they should be getting on with their careers.  But the whole system of compulsory National Service was about to disappear even as Lodge was writing, which inevitably leaves Ginger, You’re Barmy as a period piece protesting against something that is now mainly of historical interest.

However, the “angry young man” aspect of this novel is only part of the story. Ginger, You’re Barmy is written in the first-person with Jonathan Browne as narrator, and we are soon aware that he is a rather devious and unlikeable character, finding excuses for his own behaviour while castigating others. Morally flawed, he may be reporting barrack-room conditions accurately, but he is clearly an opportunist. One strand of the plot (signalled to us at the novel’s very opening) is that he has moved in on his pal Mike’s girlfriend and supplanted him. Lodge also has to create a plot to keep the documentary readable. An NCO bullies and abuses an inept recruit to the point of causing his death (whether by accident or suicide is a matter for debate). The impulsive Mike takes an elaborate revenge. How plausible this part of the novel is will be something readers have to decide. For this reader, after all the documentary, it seemed a leap into the implausible.

 


The British Museum is Falling Down (first published in 1965) is witty and relatively short – though, alas, much of its humour now seems dated and laboured. Adam Appleby, in his mid-twenties, has very little income and is researching his doctoral thesis on a linguistic-literary topic, “Long Sentences in Modern Fiction”. This requires him to visit the British Museum Reading Room every day. But on the one day when the novel’s action takes place, Adam is preoccupied with something else. He and his wife Barbara are practising Catholics and the church opposes artificial birth control. Adam and Barbara, housed in cheap and uncomfortable lodgings, already have three young children and, given that the “rhythm” method of birth control is so unreliable (“Vatican roulette” according to its critics), Adam lives in mortal fear of Barbara being pregnant again. This is what distracts him throughout a totally unproductive day in the Reading Room. Adam daydreams. For a number of pages, he imagines himself as the pope, repealing the church’s ban on contraception.

Much of the novel’s comedy depends on broad slapstick. Adam inadvertently sets off a fire alarm in the Reading Room. Adam has to fend off a sex-hungry teenage girl when he’s trying to get hold of what he thinks is a valuable manuscript. His unreliable motor-scooter explodes. There’s also the comedy of awkwardness and social discomfort. Adam just happens to bump into his parish priest when he’s about to buy some contraceptives. In a gathering of literary academics, one character talks about “Kingsley Anus”, “C.P.Slow” and “Mormon Nailer”.

But most of the comedy relies on pastiches of canonical writers and extended literary jokes, befitting a student of literature. A novel confined to a single day consciously echoes the structure of James Joyce’s Ulysses and Virginia Woolf’s Mrs Dalloway. There’s a descriptive passage mimicking the sex-obsessed D.H. Lawrence (“He passed through the narrow vaginal passage, and entered the huge womb of the Reading Room” etc.). When Adam attempts to renew his reader’s card, he faces a meaningless bureaucracy out of Kafka. A group of Asians in the Reading Room brings forth what sounds like an overwrought description by Conrad. Adam’s meeting with supervisors of his thesis is recorded in a plodding, cloth-eared style that can only be a parody of C.P.Snow’s dull prose. The terse dialogue with a group of “butchers” is Hemingwayesque. All this is fun up to a point, but also arch. We know that some jokes will be laboured as soon as we hear the protagonist’s name – Adam – for Adam was the father of mankind, which is exactly what Adam Appleby doesn’t want to be. As for Adam’s study of “Long Sentences in Modern Fiction”, probably the longest such sentence is Molly Bloom’s soliloquy at the end of Ulysses, so inevitably The British Museum is Falling Down ends with Barbara voicing her fears of pregnancy and child-raising in a pastiche of Molly Bloom. And having noted all this, I’m sure there are some literary jokes that passed me by.

While laughing often enough at this novel, I found much of its self-conscious style overwhelmed, and finally smothered, what I think must have been intended as a satire on official Catholic teaching and consequent hardships for young parents.

Two matters of interest. At some points in the story, Adam Appleby suffers from an inexplicable pain in his knee. David Lodge made this same affliction a major plot-point in his later novel Therapy. In his autobiography, Lodge explains that The British Museum is Falling Down was originally going to be called The British Museum Has Lost Its Charm, a line from the Gershwin song “A Foggy Day in London Town” – but his publisher couldn’t clear the copyrighted line with the Gershwin estate.

 

Out of the Shelter (first published 1970 – slightly revised for 1985 reprint) was Lodge’s fourth novel. As he says in the Afterword to the revised edition, and as he explains in detail in the first volume of his autobiography  Quite a Good Time to Be Born, it is the most autobiographical of all this novels. Timothy Young grows up in a modest lower-middle-class Catholic household in London, during the war years and their immediate aftermath. He has vivid memories of the Blitz and of the family crammed in the backyard shelter during air-raids. There is tragedy when a neighbour’s house suffers a direct hit, killing a little girl with whom the boy used to play. Then come the drab years of rationing and austerity. But there is an unexpected lifeline from this. Timothy’s elder sister Kath – quite a few years older than he – has found work as a secretary with the American army. In 1951, when Timothy is 16, she invites him to holiday where she is stationed in Heidelberg, one of the few German cities untouched by wartime bombing. So Timothy leaves behind grey depressing post-war England and finds himself in a foreign town where occupying Americans are in charge. Instead of modest rationed meals he dines on thick juicy steak and Baked Alaska  and finds himself in the company of precocious American boys of his own age, who drink milkshake after milkshake until they make themselves sick. Americans dominate the roads of Heidelberg in their latest-model Fords and Buicks. They have requisitioned all the best hotels and swimming pools. In full swing is a consumerism unknown to the English boy – Coca Cola apparently on tap all day long; large and fully-stocked refrigerators; long-playing records spinning in stacked order at parties; elaborate birthday parties thrown by wealthy American parents, including a party held on a riverboat cruising the Neckar, where the American teenagers indulge in the alien American custom of “necking”; gambling and – cautiously explored by Timothy – sex.

            The protagonist’s name is has obvious significance – “Young” – as this is a young man’s coming-of-age novel. In the opening chapter, Lodge writes his third-person narrative in a simple and naïve style, indicating the naivete of the little boy. The boy’s perception develops in adolescence, but not too much. Indeed, a little clumsily, Lodge has to add a postscript clarifying relationships between adult characters which the adolescent boy didn’t understand. The title Out of the Shelter also has obvious significance. Timothy has come literallly out of the bomb-shelter that protected him as a child, but also out of the shelter of English insularity, for the first time confronting another culture and American consumerism. One minor German character, Rudolf, makes it clear to Timothy that Germans suffered in the war, too, modifying his hitherto simplistic, boyish view of what the war entailed. Separated from his Catholic family, and with his hedonistic big sister Kath having lost her faith, Timothy also begins to think about religion differently. And then there is the matter of sex.

            Nearly all the details given so far in this notice are pure autobiography. 16-year-old Lodge did take a long holiday in American-occupied Heidelberg in 1951. Also, though it seems improbable, like Timothy he really did live there in a hostel for young women, having to remain hidden in his room when the other tenants were around. But two things are pure fiction. It was his mature aunt Eileen who invited him to Heidelberg, not an older sister. (Lodge was an only child and has no siblings.) This does affect the novel as Kath comes across more like a solicitous aunt than a sister to the teenager. Then there is the matter of sex. I’m sure 16-year-old David Lodge’s mind and body boiled and bubbled with erotic imagery as any teenage boy’s mind and body do. But at least some of the (relatively mild) sexual experiences Timothy has play more like erotic wish-fulfilment fantasies than lived experience.

 


            Changing Places (published 1975) was the first of Lodge’s “campus novels”. It is built on a  comic conceit as old as the fable of the town mouse and the country mouse. Two academics swap places and each not only discovers how the other lives, but each actually comes to embrace the other’s way of life. Specifically American academic Morris Zapp, specialising in Eng. Lit., takes up a visiting professorship at Rummidge University (in other words, David Lodge’s University of Birmingham). Meanwhile Philip Swallow, lecturer at Rummidge University also in Eng. Lit., takes up a visiting professorship at  Zapp’s Euphoria College in the state of Euphoria near the city of Esseph with its Silver Span bridge (i.e. in California near San Francisco with its Golden Gate bridge). To state the bleeding obvious, Changing Places is in part David Lodge’s response to his own time as a visiting professor at Berkeley, California.

Neatly for Lodge’s plot, Philip Swallow, after some other sexual adventures, moves in with, and partners, Zapp’s wife Desiree who was in the process of divorcing Zapp. And Morris Zapp eventually moves in with Swallow’s wife, and mother of their three children, Hilary. This is the stuff of standard bedroom farce and the tale involves such obvious japes as a cupboard full of empty tobacco tins falling on Zapp’s head when he explores Swallow’s study, and Swallow’s private conversation with his faraway wife being accidentally broadcast on a talkback show. In its resolution, Morris and Desiree and Philip and Hilary seem to be settling on a menage-a-quatre. Had Lodge been watching Bob and Carol and Ted and Alice?

As is so often the case, Lodge can’t resist showing off his savvy about literary genres – a trait that, frankly, becomes more than a little tiresome if you read all his novels. A section of the novel is written in the form of letters between the four main protagonists, but then Lodge spoils the joke by explaining it when he has one correspondent write, of a book she is sending, “There’s a whole chapter on how to write an epistolary novel, but surely nobody’s done that since the eighteenth century?” Ho, ho, ho and how self-referential. Following this there’s a section in the form of newspaper clippings (John Dos Passos, anyone?). The finale is the four-way conversation of Morris and Desiree and Philip and Hilary, presented as a screenplay. Such fun.

What is the comparison Lodge makes between an American campus and an English one? Dare I say it’s rather predictable. Students in England tend to be more conformist and are only beginning to become rebellious under American influence. English professors are more stuffy and authoritarian. Students in the USA are openly rebellious all the time, go in for noisy demos at the drop of a hat, rumble with the police and loudly insist that they have a part in running the college. Their professors court students’ favour by acting like their peers and pals. In England, it is really the American Zapp who shakes up the University of Rummige’s administration and in effect stages a coup in the Eng.Lit. department. Poor Philip Swallow makes little impact on the University of Euphoria, but does adopt its ways. There’s a lot more open, unbuttoned and promiscuous sex in the USA than there is in England and Swallow goes happily down that rabbit-hole.

Given that the novel is now nearly half-a-century old, and seems set even a little earlier than that (1968 maybe?), much of it is very dated with its anti-Vietnam War protests, jokes about state governor Ronald Duck (obviously Ronald Reagan) etc. There is an odd, and I suspect unintentional undertone to it. Lodge wallows so much in the luxurious meals, available sex, mod cons and easy-going teaching style that Swallow finds in Euphoria, that is comes across as real yearning for these things. Lodge doesn’t satirise so much as he envies. Its very much like teenager Tim Young in Out of the Shelter being bedazzled by the American Way of Life.

 

Something Thoughtful

Nicholas Reid reflects in essay form on general matters and ideas related to literature, history, popular culture and the arts, or just life in general. You are free to agree or disagree with him.  

                                                       IS THE CINEMA DYING?

 

In 2017, in a much-reprinted interview, the American film director and producer Martin Scorsese said that real movies are dying. It was, he said, harder and harder for truly adult films to be financed and to be seen on the big cinema screens. He cited the dominance of films relying on computer-generated images, meaning that big money-spinners now were what he called “theme-park movies” – blockbuster superhero junk aimed at adolescent and juvenile audiences. Franchises dominated, allowing for the repetition of the same formula in film after film. On top of this, he said, the proliferation of easily-accessible images on computers and mobile phones was robbing films of their uniqueness as spectacle. 

 


 

His views might have been broad generalisations, but I can’t help endorsing the general drift of what he said. On the whole, if you want to see something truly grown-up, you no longer go to the big movie houses. You might go to the boutique or art-house cinemas, but even there now, there are far too may films pandering to an old audience who want comfort rather than real cinematic quality. So there’s your choice: superhero rubbish or comfy, often period-set, movies for oldsters. You’d be better off staying at home and whistling up something from Youtube or Netflix.

Recently, I encountered an inadvertent endorsement of Scorsese’s thesis from an unlikely source, but it’s a tangled story so please stay with me.

Way back in 1995, Martin Scorsese scripted and narrated A Century of Cinema – A Personal Journey Through American Movies. In America, it was shown as a TV series; but in New Zealand and elsewhere it was shown as one very long film in the international film festival, which was where I caught it. Scorsese certainly expressed his personal views of movies but, as I recall it, he shaped his survey of American cinema around genres, analysing gangster films, romcoms, musicals, westerns etc. and being very open-minded even about movies that were clearly not to his taste.

Just a few weeks back, I saw a similar film, only this time the work of a French film director examining French cinema. Made in 2016 and only now shown in New Zealand in the French Film Festival, this was  Bertrand Tavernier’sVoyage a travers le cinema francais or in English My Journey Through French Cinema. I sat through all three hours and ten minutes of it with an audience of about 50 people in a niche cinema. As an usher warned us at the beginning, there was no intermission. Seven or eight people obviously couldn’t take the pace, and walked out well before halfway through. Tavernier’s approach was far more idiosyncratic than Scorsese’s. Tavernier did not structure his reflections around genres and did not examine French films in the chronological order in which those films were made; but by the order in which he encountered films. Early on, he said that he was a child of the Popular Front (i.e. France’s left-wing political coalition before the Second World War) and of the Liberation, so many of his favourable judgments had to do with films depicting people working idealistically together for the common good, and there was the odd comment about who did or did not resist during the Occupation. He was also clearly a child of the nouvelle vague, endorsing the “new wave” of French film-makers and self-styled auteurs of the late 1950s and 1960s.

 


 

            So – with generous clips from all the films he discussed - he began with the director Jacques Becker, because the first film that impressed him as a child in the late 1940s was a gangster film made by Becker. This in turn led him to talk about two directors who flourished earlier in the 1930s, Jean Delannoy then (in more detail) Jean Renoir.

When Tavernier entered the film industry himself, he was mentored by the producer-director Jean-Pierre Melville. Apparently Melville was a bit of a tyrant and erratic in his working methods, often alienating cast and crew. (Tavernier plays a bootleg recording of the actor Jean-Paul Belmondo shouting angrily at Melville for wasting his time by missing schedules and otherwise mistreating him.) But at this point Tavernier moves in another direction and devotes a long section of his film to the huge effect the actor Jean Gabin had on French films and how he’d been handled by different directors. This in turn leads him to discuss the unique role of music in French films, briefly referencing music in films by Marcel Carne and Jean Vigo. French directors worked in collaboration with composers; in America, musical scores were usually imposed upon completed films, with the director having little say in the matter. So we hear much about French composers for film such a Maurice Jaubert, Georges Auric and Kosma.

I forget what the segue was, but for some reason this leads him to deal with the cheap, raw 1950s and 1960s gangster films starring Eddie Constantine as Lemmy Caution, basically formulaic B movies. This, of course, was another trait of the nouvelle vague–ists of Tavernier’s vintage – a tendency to claim great aesthetic merit in schlock films as a way of thumbing their noses at the more formal “classic” films that preceded them. And so, inevitably, to Jean-Luc Godard who also loved the schlock. Tavernier told us, with illustrative clips of course, how much he admired “beauty”of Godard’s films. Heretic that I am, I still regard Godard’s films as pretentious and often clumsily made tosh. However, saving the day a bit, Tavernier then gives generous space to Francois Truffaut’s Les Quatre Cents Coups (The 400 Blows) and then he rushes back to look at the (very minor) 1930s director Edmond Greville before fading out.

As I said, this was a very idiosyncratic survey of French films, in no way as all-encompassing as Martin Scorsese’s survey of American films, and based very much on what had influenced Tavernier himself or on people he had worked with. At the end, I couldn’t help reflecting on all the great or at least influential French film directors who were not mentioned or were skipped over in a one-liner – Louis Feuillade, Abel Gance, Rene Clair, Marcel Pagnol,  Jean Gremillon, Julien Duvivier, Henri-Georges Clouzot, Claude Autant-Lara, Yves Allegret,  Jacques Tati, Robert Bresson, Louis Malle, Claude Chabrol. As a rather lame apology for not mentioning all these worthies, there was a little joke at the end saying “Coming Attractions” and listing those who had been ignored.

I’d like to make it clear that I regard Tavernier himself as an important and interesting director. I was already a young film-reviewer when, in 1974 I saw his L’Horloger de Saint-Paul (The Clockmaker) and was impressed by it. Later I thought his Round Midnight (1986) was one of the best fictional films concerning jazz that I’ve ever seen, and his La vie et rien d’autre (Life and Nothing But, 1989) a moving meditation on war and death. Maybe the most recent Tavernier film I’ve seen, Quay d’Orsay (The French Minister, 2013) was a bit more predictable – a satire on questionable decisions made by France’s Foreign Affairs department – but even so the director’s hand was sure.

But at last we come to my enigmatic comment about Tavernier’s survey inadvertently endorsing what Martin Scorsese said about the death of the movies.

Bertrand Tavernier (who died aged 80 in March of this year) stays only with movies made between the 1930s and late 1960s. One film only from the 1970s is referenced. It is as if he wished to completely ignore all the films made after the 1960s. It can’t have been because he had not seen or was unaware of French cinema between the 1970s and 2016 when Voyage a travers le cinema francais was made. He himself was still a part of the French film-making community up to this year. The only conclusion I can reach is that he either did not wish to discuss either his contemporaries or his own films; OR he was aware of the great decline in quality of French films over recent years – the imitation of, or pandering to, American and “international” tastes; the false images of what France is in films aimed at tourists; the lack of any outstanding or emerging directors.

            In his own way, he was saying the movies were dying.

Monday, June 21, 2021

Something New

  We feature each fortnight Nicholas Reid's reviews and comments on new and recent books.

“WHAT FIRE” by Alice Miller (Pavilion – University of Liverpool Press, $NZ37); “REJOICE INSTEAD – The Collected Poems of Peter Hooper” (Cold Hub Press, $NZ42:50)

 

            If you look up Nowhere Nearer on this blog, you will find reviews of Alice Miller's two earlier collections of poetry, The Limits and Nowhere Nearer. What now interests me about these two collections is how different they are from each other. The poet’s voice and preoccupations had changed. The Limits adopted a style that was almost cryptic, sometimes impenetrable, relying very much on imagery verging on the surreal. One suspected that it encoded many personal things that were not immediately comprehensible to the reader. By contrast, Nowhere Nearer often dealt with public issues, reflecting on the inevitablility of death and the march of time, but also considering the loss of certain cultures and the rootlessness which had become what I described as “the malaise of the modern world”. In this second collection, Alice Miller often referred to what could be called High European Culture as well as Classical mythology. Given the severe and stoical tone of some of her work, I referred to Miller as “a latter-day Schopenhauer”. I am delighted to learn that she was not offended by this sobriquet. Need I add that I found her work enriching and enlightening?

            Alice Miller is an expatriate New Zealander now based in Berlin, some of whose work has been published in German. Her third collection What Fire is a development and extension of many of the themes and ideas she expressed in Nowhere Nearer


By and large, it is a very bleak world that is delineated in her verse, but it is not a series of counsels to despair. There are gleams of optimism and hope for human beings, even if they have to be grasped quickly before they vanish. Schopenhauer is modified by good sense and sometimes by love.

In this collection, Miller often situates her poems in specific landscapes. There is occasionally a tendency to Cartesian rationalism as in a poem like “After the Catastrophe”, which raises the possibility that life isn’t real. But most of her landscapes are based on hard empirical observation, even if this is a platform for ideas. One of her most delicately crafted poems “What Becomes Her” has a second-person “you” walking by the Berlin river Spree trying to read the angst in other people and in herself. The cold landscape of fjords is mentioned in a number of poems, while “After the Internet” presents a sort of apocalyptic vision of ruined land and both “The Lighthouse” and “Taillight” suggest a decaying world which one has to endure. A nightmarish fantasia, not exactly a real landscape, dominates the title poem “What Fire”, which appears to have overtones of “night and fog” (Nacht und Nebel) in the most sinister sense that would resonate with one based in Germany. This is the type of densely-considered poem deserving the type of detailed exegesis that cannot be given in a general review of this sort. It is certainly one of the poet’s best.

A strong streak of determinism marks one of Miller’s best river poems “The Fork of Five Rivers”. It pairs Samuel Butler, on his South Island sheep station Mesopotamia, with the river Spree and other rivers. But  We each have our own    scheduled      future, drowning. / We each have our own paradise inside
 / waiting to drown us       from the inside out.” In similar deterministic tone, “Awake” declares that “the woods are all / 
the same woods, no divergent twig, no path
 / that wasn’t pre-written into existence by a programme
 / you’ve seen so many times before you could recite
 / each oak, each branch.”


Where, ultimately, does determinism take us? To death, obviously, and death is one of Miller’s major concerns. The opening poem “Seams” considers a life’s journey as a planned trip and ends “What song / 
will you sing as the light leaves,  / as the mask’s lowered over your eyes?” Here the dominant image for life is a journey by plane over countries seen only briefly. The same image recurs in “New Wings”, “Orbit” and other poems. “Das Gift” and “Extinction” sound out decay and death. Death is “The Goddess of Death”, referencing Maori mythology respectfully and yet, in its profuse closing detail, also managing to be grotesquely funny. “New Valkyrie” has the female warriors of Norse myth gathering corpses from battlefields. In this collection, it is women who are most frequently related to the concept of death. “Exit” begins with the words “Do we begin in death? What kind of building / is a womb, to live inside, / breach the only way through?”


But then there are poems that relate to women in other ways. “Mutter” tells us that women grow into being their own mothers. “Volumnia”, which derives from Plutarch’s and Shakespeare’s life of Coriolanus,  refers to a mother producing a warlike and destructive son. (Incidentally the epigraph of  What Fire  are words spoken by Volumnia to Coriolanus I am hush’d until our city be a-fire, And then I’ll speak a little. “) And then there is the obvious fact that women interact with men, not always happily. “Held Under” concerns over-controlling men. Both “What We Find” and “The River” appear, in their allusive way, to be about a marriage or relationship breaking up. Not that misandrony is suggested when “Vanishing Point” declares “I wake up / with you and the world seems new” though the poem does then go on to say how odd this impulse is when the word is doomed. [For the record, I cannot help noting that in the acknowlegements the poet gives thanks to the man she loves.]

Having noted this, however, the dominant note of this collection is fearful, hesitant and uncertain of the future of human beings.“The Miracle” tries to find something unique in human beings as opposed to other animals, but is still waiting for such uniqueness. Most wrenching of all is the confessional poem “Sunday”, where there is a strong, and irrational, sense of guilt as she feels helpless to do anything about her friend’s cancer, and is not sure that poetry will be of any help.

I think in this review I have given a fair outline of Alice Miller’s preoccupations and philosophical ideas. Decay, determinism, death, the possible mitigation of life by love, and the importance of observation. But this does not really communicate to you the aesthetic quality of her verse. The philosophy is grim, it’s daunting, it’s challenging, sometimes it’s even depressing. But it’s clear, it’s forthright, it’s undisguised, it shows fortitude in the face of inevitable death and decay. It’s a brave voice clearly expressing itself.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

Rejoice Instead – the Collected Poems of Peter Hooper is an exercise in restoring the memory of a poet who was in danger of being completely forgotten. As Pat White, the editor of this collection, tells us in his Introduction, the poetry of Peter Hooper (1919-1991) appeared first in slim volumes that are now hard to find.  Some of his verse appeared in anthologies in the 1970s and 1980s but then he faded from view. Hooper was fastidious in writing and re-writing his poetry, and many poems lay unpublished when he died. Though Hooper was born on the South Island’s West Coast, his mother was English and when he was a child she often read to him the work of English Romantics. Romantic, or more precisely the post-Victorian form of modified Romanticism better known as Georgianism, was the greatest influence on Hooper’s early work.  He was a late starter and did not produce publishable poetry in earnest until the early 1960s, when he was in his forties and after he had spent time in England. Only gradually did he shuck off the English influence and begin to write about specifically New Zealand landscapes. In his case, this meant the landscape of Greymouth and the West Coast where he spent most of his life. Even so, his style remained very much that of early Modernism. He was loyal to simple verse structures and rejected post-modernism. As White notes, he did make friends with some artists and poets and was much admired by Colin McCahon. His poems inspired some of McCahon’s painting. But, though he worked as a school-teacher, his life tended to be solitary. Pat White makes a case for Peter Hooper as an early conservationist, and there certainly is a strong thematic thread in his work of respect for the natural wilderness. However, it is only in a few poems that Hooper becomes polemical. He is mainly concerned with interpeting the quality of landscape rather than preaching about it.

I read my way methodically through the well-presented 220 pages of these collected poems, lamenting only one thing. The table of contents lists Hooper’s poems chonologically, under the titles of the original “slim volumes” in which they appeared. The poems that follow also appear in chronological order of first publication, but for some reason the titles of the original “slim volumes” do not appear in the body of the text.  Even so, I was able to walk through Hooper’s work from early 1960s to early 1990s, seeing how his preoccupations (slowly) changed.

In Hooper’s very first publication “A Map of Morning” (1964) the poem “Walking in Summer Wind” announces very clearly where Hooper was going to go, declaring “And I remember / Whitman would wrestle with brotherly trees / who gave no quarter / answering strength with strength / knowing what the wise and children have always known / earth has no limits to her joy. There is a rejoicing in nature, Whitmanesque but also Wordsworthian in inspiration but (despite the free forms Hooper often employs) Georgian in effect, with much use of words like “benison”, “woe”, “embrace”, “Songs innumerable” and their ilk. And be it noted that nearly all of the poems in this, his first collection, are set on the other side of the world from New Zealand – Reigate, Anne Hathaway’s Cottage, London, Daffodils and Oak Trees, Perugia, Provence, Japanese prints and poems honouring authors of his era such as “Reading Zhivago” and “For Patrick White”. But even in this, there are stabs at current realities. “Farnborough 1961”, for exmple, set at the show-place for Britain’s military aircraft, sees the planes as merely bearers of death. A pacifist tendency is implied.

Hooper’s second collection “Journey Towards an Elegy” (1969) may include a poem in memoriam of T.S.Eliot, and it may still often use traditional poetic forms – the perfectly rhymed sonnet “The Drudge” or the neatly crossed rhymes of both “Of Love and Time” and “Hoeing Beans”. But, as Pat White’s Introduction has clearly signalled, the scene has changed completely and is now definitely situated on the West Coast of the South Island. References to the West Coast abound – Stockton, Larrikins Flat, Blackball Creek, much wind from the sea, dense bush and trees, coprosma berries, and of course rain, as well as manly pursuits like chopping wood and hoeing beans. The most tragic work is coal-mining where (says the poem “Jimmy”) “the black hills have no cry / for death by stone dust razoring the lung”. Life is pinched and disappointing for some, as in the poem “Retired” about a disappointed retired schoolteacher. The title poem “Journey Towards an Elegy” is one of Hooper’s very best – commemorating his visit to the grave in Italy where lay his brother Tony, killed in the Second World War. The hard message it gives is that graves are not as potent as our memories of the dead; and “Journey Towards an Elegy” also emphasises the sense of distance and separation from home a visit to Europe means for a New Zealander. It is in this collection that Hooper produces a sort of poetic manifesto with “Poetry is for Peasants” claiming “Only when the feet and hands / know the earth / in agony and joy / can the mind be nourished / on beautiful words”. This is a call to life experience rather than intellectual concepts as the force of poetry. The concluding sequence “Notes in the Margin” show a radical change in style, Hooper now being terse, speaking more colloquially and stripping away much of the elevated vocabulary that was seen in his earlier work. The very short collection “The Mind of Bones” (1971) leaps very far indeed from Hooper’s first collection – now all poems are lean and short and referencing the present moment with garden reflections on sparrows and one inspired by reading Baxter’s “Jerusalem Sonnets”.

“Fragments III: Earth Marriage” (1972)  begins with the prose essay “Earth Light” where Hooper begins by praising the unique quality of light on the West Coast and tells us how he has grown into the landscape. He notes that his poems often present isolated human figures but that does not mean that people on the West Coast are unaware of the greater world. He now does sound a clear conservationist view when he declares his continued loyalty to Thoreau (later in this collections comes the poem “Homage to Thoreau”)  and speaks of “the earth-mother, whom modern man has so tragically rejected”. And finally, after listing his favourite poets, he despairs of the type of academic criticism that over-analyses poems. The sequence “Pencilled by the rain” yields the distressing but truthful lines “Here at the world’s end / we’re not exempt / from the harvest of folly. / At our roots / burn Europe’s poisons. You’ll find / no primal innocence beneath the fern.” Hooper builds beautiful but melancholy images of bird-life on the Coast, but is sure that “I wander the ways of a squandered country” mitigated only by the thought that “there’s not much time for cleverness / but a little maybe for love”. There is a moral robustness to this – a sense that no landscape is fully free of corruption.  But in the same collection, poems like “Three Pines by the Hohomu” lay bare Hooper’s stylistic weaknesses – a tendency to Whitmanesque overstatement and bombast in such lines “I am become a part / of earth, of the river that flows forever, / I share the endurance of her centuries / in the roots of the pines….” Etc. The “Profiles in Monochrome” (1974) are vignettes of people who lived on the Coast either before the poet’s time or when he was a child. Some of the “profiles” are dispiriting, but collectively, they build up a convincing picture of a certain sort of community.       What appeared in “Selected Poems” (1977) is still dominated by landscape but Hooper’s tone is more regretful, melancholy and dwelling on loss. There is a sense that human beings are destructive intruders, as in “Cloudfaring” where “I know without rancour / that the islands of the blest / were always mirage, / that our feet have only / the clay tracks word / in the rough pastures / below our sombre hill.” Certainly two poems about the ill health and death of his mother “Huia Villa” are pained elegy and “Rain Over Westland’emphasises one of the less pleasant features of the region. Naturally there is a strong sense of loss in elegy for Muriel, one of the few poems suggesting the poet’s sexuality

Then there are all the unpublished poems with which Hooper’s writing career ended. With the unpublished “Poems From a Study,” he begins to take up the habit of writing in the third person as “the Old Man”, who takes ovet the unpublished  “Stones of Longacres”. While Hooper’s preoccupations are as they had been for decades, the vocabulary is different. Some locutions still linger from his earlier quasi-Georgian style, but you wouldn’t get words like “sheepshit” and “pisses” in his earlier work.. The language now is more raw and colloquial as in a very short poem like “Thumbs” which begins “He knows it’s winter / cold winds over the paddocks / when his thumbs / split at the corners / a thread of cotton / slices the cut  / to instant torture.” Other poems suggest the roughness of rural life in a style some distance from dithyrambs on birds, winds and trees. “Poets and Paddocks”, one of his longer poems, attempts to fuse his academic past with rural realities. But there is rejoicing in the what is almost an epigram “Old Man in a Garden” which reads in full “Up to my knees / grass in the gully / over my head / a tui scold in the kowhai / I should worry / I rejoice instead” . Not only does this brief poem give this Collected Poems its name, and not only is it quoted in full on the back cover, but it gives a fitting note of serenity and acceptance to one who has so often brooded on the past and isolation and elegies. You accept your lot in the land where you stand, for all its defects, and you rejoice in the beauties nature gives. The closing essay “A Window upon Mountains” reaffirms Hooper’s Thoreauvian view of nature as a window to the soul and resonates most loudly with current conservationist thinking.

How do I assess this resurrected poet from the past? I do not think Peter Hooper will ever be remembered in the same way as Curnow, Baxter and other much-anthologised poets of his era. But I hesitate to use that damning term “minor poet”. Though his canvas is narrow, his interests few and early expressed, and his style often of a past age, he is a thoughtful poet who at his best conveys strongly the sense of a particular time and place. He observes nature carefully and expresses it vividly. Certainly a poet dserving a place in the New Zealand canon.

Something Old

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.   

            “QUITE A GOOD TIME TO BE BORN: Becoming a Writer, 1935-1975” by David Lodge (first published 2015); “WRITER”S LUCK”|: A Memoir, 1976-1991” by David Lodge (first published 2018)

 

 

            Often it is sheer serendipity that sets you reading the works of a particular author.

Some months ago, my wife and I were going to the wedding of a nephew, to be celebrated just outside Featherston. For us, this meant a drive from Auckland to the Wairarapa. Quite a long haul at the best of times, but lengthened by the fact that, when we were south of Taupo, we found that the Desert Road was closed because of an accident – so we had to drive around the western side of the mountains in the central plateau, adding a couple of hours to our journey. Fortunately, we were entertained the whole way. We’d borrowed from the local library a 13-CD set of the actor David Timson reading the first volume of the autobiography of English novelist David Lodge (born 1935). It’s called  Quite a Good Time to Be Born, subtitled “Becoming a Writer, 1935-1975” (first published in 2015). This kept us listening from Auckland to Wairarapa and most of the way back from Wairarapa to Auckland.

Perhaps you share my view of autobiographies. Nine times out of ten, the most interesting, revealing and intriguing parts of an autobiography concern the childhood, youth and young adulthood of the author – that is, the years of formation before a public persona is established. Thus it was with Quite a Good Time to Be Born.

David Lodge gives a vivid account of being the son of a musician, brought up in a lower-middle-class household in Brockley on the fringes of London. He remembers precisely the type of schools he went to, and the time, during the Second World War, when it was all air-raids and bomb-shelters and evacuation. Of course throughout his autobiography, he tells us what experiences fed into the novels that he later wrote. So these childhood experiences of wartime became the basis of part of his novel Out of the Shelter. After both his schooldays and his first university degrees were over, it being the period of the Cold War when all Western countries wanted to ensure their Youth was Fit to Fight, Lodge had to do two years of compulsory national (military) service. This meant two dull and soul-destroying years in a tank regiment… out of which he later produced the novel Ginger, You’re Barmy.

The most formative thing in his earlier years, however, was that he was raised a Catholic. His parents he presents as tolerant and broad-minded people, but still committed to their religion, and of course young David’s schooldays were spent in Catholic schools. He gives a bad report to only one school – a primary school which he briefly attended as a tot, run by rather severely disciplinarian nuns. For the rest of his schools, they were run on strict lines as all grammar schools then were, but he recalls with affection most of the priests and religious brothers who taught him, and remembers one Irish lay teacher who really set him on the path of loving literature and writing. He is very precise and detailed about how Catholic life was in the pre-Vatican II period, with long fasts undertaken, confession regularly attended, pilgrimages taken by groups of Catholic university students, consciousness of sin and a firm sense of Heaven and Hell.

Again, most of this he relates in a good-natured way, and tells how he became a critic by writing a thesis on British Catholic novelists. But his attitudes (if not the church’s) gradually changed once he was married and had to deal with the church’s ban on artificial contraception. His wife Mary was also a practising Catholic and the couple struggled with the church’s ruling. This tension fed into his novels The British Museum is Falling Down and especially How Far Can You Go?, both of which dealt with this part of Catholic life in terms of comedy. David and Mary were to have three children, the youngest of whom had Down’s Syndrome. Lodge apologises for using the outmoded and offensive term “Mongolism”, but that was the term that was still routinely used in the 1960s. Against the advice of people who suggested their Down’s Syndrome son should be put into a special hospital, the Lodges embraced him as one of the family and were glad they did.

Lodge in recent years has said that he has basically withdrawn from the church – but despite satirising the severe strictures surrounding sexual activity that were the norm in his youth, he also says that the old rules of courtship and sexual activity being confined to marriage were, in the long run, saner than much that has followed the “sexual revolution”.

These earlier sections of Quite a Good Time to Be Born are the most relatable. Once Lodge gets into his first years as a lecturer and then a professor of English Literature, the narrative becomes a little less engaging. Lodge spent the whole of his professorial career at the University of Birmingham, juggling his teaching activities with being both a prolific novelist and a prolific critic. He also paid a number of long visits to the USA as a visiting professor at Berkeley in California. Inevitably there are anecdotes of the colleagues he worked with, friendships, departmental clashes over courses and the type of things one expects in an account of a campus. Many names of academics – some of them well-known as critics – are mentioned. Lodge eventually wrote three campus novels  and was often mistaken for his contemporary and friend Malcolm Bradbury, who also wrote campus novels. Lodge’s first campus novel Changing Places was published the same year (1975) as Malcolm Bradbury’s more  bitter campus novel The History Man and critics praised both novels in the same terms.

Even when he is dealing with his academic contemporaries, however, Lodge is usually good-humoured. There are, at most, one or two people of whom he writes negative things. At least in this first volume of his autobiography, Lodge seems to be somebody who actively likes human beings, rejoices in other people’s achievements, and regards his own successes as a piece of luck for which he himself is not necessarily responsible. And yet, as Quite a Good Time to Be Born reaches its later chapters, we feel more and more heavily the effect of a mere chronicle, as if Lodge is dutifully ticking off events in his life rather than saying anything illuminating about them. The vivid nature of the childhood and early-manhood chapters has evaporated.

 

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

 

 

Well, that was my response to hearing David Timson read Quite a Good Time to Be Born. Despite my misgivings about the later parts of the memoir, I was impressed enough, when I got back to Auckland, to whistle up from the national library service a copy of David Lodge’s second tome of autobiography, Writer’s Luck, mainly covering the years when, after after 27 years teaching in the University of Birmingham’s English Department, and after having established himself as a novelist with many publications, he decided to become a full-time writer.

Alas, this second volume is a very dull tome indeed. In his opening chapter, Lodge informs us laboriously of his further drawing away from Catholicism and the brief period when he sank into the nebulous “Sea of Faith” movement. Much later (p.234) he has a kind of epiphany and decides that he does believe in God but is an agnostic in that he embraces no particular religion. He compares notes with (Catholic convert) novelist Muriel Spark and (lapsed Catholic) novelist Anthony Burgess. Even more laboriously, he lectures us on structuralism, post-structuralism and deconstructionism, subjects of his academic books. He says that in 1976, when he produced Modes of Modern Writing, he came to the conclusion that the jargon of post-modernism was becoming impenetrable and tended to “mystify rather than enlighten” (To which, with the utmost crudity, I can only say “No shit, Sherlock”.) He chronicles how all his children did at school, what holidays they spent together (often in Ireland), and how his Down’s Syndrome son was accommodated. He tells us about visits to his ailing aunt in Hawaii. He also tells us how, out of pure curiosity, he saw a porn film while in France, and he touches gingerly on the fact that, while he himself is monogamous and no philanderer, he has nevertheless put sexually-explicit episodes into some of his novels, to the bemusement of some critics.

Very rapidly, though, Writer’s Luck lapses into accounts of more academic conferences attended (both before and after Lodge ceased to be an active academic) and the worthies who were there, with many familiar names being dropped. This always leads Lodge into telling us how everything fed into his series of “campus novels”. One gets the distinct impressions (a.) that most conferences he attended were more often socialising than serious academic discourse, being subsidised beanfeasts for the participants; and (b.) that whatever he has to say in his autobiographies about such conferences, he says much better in his novels. The lists of names, venues, dates and schedules are simply boring.

Once he is a full-time writer, we are inundated with the minute details of his dealings with publishers, what sort of dust-jackets his novels had, what sort of typography they had (no kidding), how his books were received and reviewed and how he fared with the Booker Prize (he was twice short-listed but never won). Obviously some of these details are necessary in the autobiography of a writer, but Lodge is very sensitive about the negative reviews he sometimes got, and often consoles himself by telling us of positive reviews that balanced them. (Okay, he never won the Booker, but Penelope Mortimer loved How Far Can You Go? and it won the Whitbread Prize, so there!). Then, once some of his novels are adapted for television, we get minute details of how he influenced or responded to each adaptation.

There are some amusing admissions. After telling us how he and other eminent academics supported a young theorist who wanted to push a “poststructuralist” view of literature, he later admits (p.124) that such an approach “became a kind of orthodoxy which ambitious young scholars felt obliged to embrace and apply to literature in a jargon-heavy discourse of tortuous obscurity.” Probably to the outrage of some New Zealand readers (but to my own covert snickers) he notes that he did read Keri Hulme’s Booker-Prize-winning The Bone People to the end, but when a friend told him that he had tried to read it three times and never finished it, Lodge “shared his opinion of its literary merit.” (p.239) He gives an amusing account of a disastrous conference on literary theory that was held in Glasgow, which had the audience turning rebellious at its patent elitism and obscurantism. Literary theory does tend to wilful mystification, after all.

The most painful episode came when he chaired and was a member of the panel judging the Booker Prize (in 1982). He favoured Martin Amis’s London Fields to get the gong, but was outmanouevred by two woman on the panel who insisted that only “ideologically correct” books should win prizes, and Amis’ novel was about an amoral, misogynistic, opportunist. I think few members of panels judging literary work ever break silence about how awards are given, and I applaud Lodge’s openness on this matter. More honest reports (on the questionable reasons some books win awards and others don’t) would help to break down the notion that book awards are always given on merit. I should add that (p.373) Lodge admits in the later part of his novel-writing career that his work lost favour, gained fewer positive reviews, and attracted a smaller readership than his earlier novels had. But he consoles himself with the fact that recently his novels, in French translation, have won great favour in France. Currently, novels by David Lodge are read by a much larger audience in France than in England.

My chief impression of Writer’s Luck was of an account being rendered – probably worked up conscientiously from diaries – by an author who is now in his eighties. Stealing somebody else’s words, allow me to quote, with approval, from Anthony Quinn’s review of Writer’s Luck in the Guardian in January 2018 (you may find it easily on line):

This book presents a writer who simply has no clue as to what he should leave out, or how to compress a narrative for the sake of pace…. The wonder is that Lodge, an award-winning novelist, literary critic and professor, has such an eye for the untelling anecdote, the irrelevant detail. The warning signs are there early on when he methodically records his children’s O and A-level results, class of degree, as if he is writing a round-robin Christmas card to some distant acquaintance.”

Quite so. Lodge is now in his mid-80s and Writer’s Luck reads like an attempt to say the last word on everything he had done.

Dull. Dull. Dull.

 

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *  

And yet, having read some of Lodge’s novels in the past, reading this two-volume autobiography did pique my interest in Lodge’s work. So over the summer season I decided to read all his novels. I will torture you with my findings on them over the next three “Something Old” postings.