Showing posts with label Orwell (George). Show all posts
Showing posts with label Orwell (George). Show all posts

26 March 2017

George Orwell in Sutton Courtenay, Oxfordshire

'NEAR TO THIS PLACE LIE
THE MORTAL REMAINS OF
GEORGE ORWELL . WRITER
. ERIC ARTHUR BLAIR .
25 JUNE 1903 . 21 JANUARY 1950'

This plaque is on the south wall of All Saints's church, Sutton Courtenay, Oxfordshire.

'HERE LIES
ERIC ARTHUR BLAIR
BORN JUNE 25TH 1903
DIED JANUARY 21ST 1950'

Orwell wanted to be buried in a country graveyard, and he was. To the right is a rather rain-weathered copy of his Homage to Catalonia which an admirer has obviously left.
'DAVID
ASTOR
1912 – 2001'

David Astor was the editor of the Observer, an owner of estate in Sutton Courtenay, a friend (and employer) of Orwell's, also responsible for seeing that Orwell's wishes were carried out. He bought two graveyard plots in All Saint's', and is buried immediately behind Orwell's grave.

23 November 2015

Boualem Sansal: 2084 : La fin du monde (2015)

In the Francophone world Boualem Sansal has for some time now been well known for his masterly use of language, for his harsh criticisms of Algeria since independence in 1962, and for his courage in speaking out against Islamist extremism. He is a major writer in French, although he is little known in the English-speaking world. I rather think things will change when his 2084 – a kind of update of George Orwell's 1984 – comes out in English translation, assuming (ahem) that it's a good translation.

This is Sansal's seventh novel, and certainly his best. But it's as if all his other novels have been leading up to this: he's covered the past and the present, so here's the future. What he can write after this is beyond me, but then of course that's of no importance here.

2084 : La fin du monde begins with an avertissement, a warning: the reader must ward against thinking that there's any truth here, everything's invented, the characters, the events, everything, and the proof of this is that the story is set in the distant future which in no respects bears any resemblance to our own. It's a work of pure invention, the warning continues, and the world of Bigaye described doesn't exist and there's no reason why it should exist in the future, just as the Big Brother imagined by Orwell in 1984 didn't exist at any time and has no reason to exist in the future. We are told (with an obvious wink) that we should sleep well in the knowledge that all this is fiction and that everything is under control. Yes, of course.

There are some evident similarities between 1984 and 2084: both are dystopias describing totalitarian worlds, both have a shadowy all-powerful leader who subjugates the people, both are in an apparently unending state of war, both have thought police, both are brutal, both have contradictory mottoes, both have a central character who is discovering the nature of and the flaws in the system, both have an underclass which is in certain respects free from the general tyranny, both have a language that seeks to reduce communication to a minimum and indeed destroy independent thought, etc. But there are major differences.

The huge empire described in 2084 is a dictatorship, although not a criticism of  a political system as Orwell's novel intended, but of religious extremism: it is a theocracy, a world ruled by a perceived god. The empire is Abistan, named after the ruler Abi, who is the 'Delegate' of the god Yӧlah – yes, there's a huge temptation to draw analogies, but this is complete fiction remember. What is described is a post-apocalyptic world, that after the wars, in which there is largely emptiness outside the capital, Qodsabad. And despite the title, this is not 2084: 2084 is the date the world began, perhaps when Abi was born, but no one seems certain and anyway the real function of the state is amnesia and submission. (Does that last word suggest Houellebecq? Oh, this is way beyond Houellebecq.)

Abilang (which conjures up Orwell's Newspeak or novlang in French) is the language used here, and the novel is peppered with its neologisms: mockba for mosque, mockbi for imam, Gkabul or livre d'Abi for Qu'ran, the men wear burnis and the women burniqabs, and so on.

Amnesia rules: 'History has been rewritten and sealed by the hand of Abi. [...] For the New Era generations, dates, the calendar, History had no importance, no more than a gust of wind in the sky, the present is eternal, today is always here'. Ati is the Winston Smith character at the beginning just released from a distant sanatorium (suggestions of Mann's Magic Mountain in reverse), and he discovers the truth behind the regime, seeks with his friend Koa and finds that there is certainly life elsewhere, that there are frontiers that can be crossed, that all is not as the lies of Abi would have everyone believe. But what can he do against the religious steamroller?

The System is all-powerful. To Orwell's 'War is peace', 'Freedom is slavery', 'Ignorance is strength' have been added Abistan's own insane vintage: 'Death is life', 'Lies are truth', and 'Logic is absurd'. Abistan's police bomb and murder wholesale, the inhabitants are subject to regular religious health checks and killed if they don't conform to the norm, neighbours must constantly spy on each other, and women are secondary citizens for men to whip.

Devastating.

My other posts on Boualem Sansal:

––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Boualem Sansal: Rue Darwin
Boualem Sansal: Le Village de l'Allemand
Boualem Sansal: Harraga
Boualem Sansal: Dis-moi le paradis
Boualem Sansal: L'Enfant fou de l'arbre creux
Boualem Sansal: Le Serment des barbares

27 January 2015

Jean-Paul Clébert: Paris insolite (1952; repr. (with photos by Patrice Molinard) 1954)


I sometimes think the internet – and I frequently ask myself how we previously managed to live without it – has made digression not only an art form but a necessity: the trouble is, how do you avoid infinite digression? I have no answers, it's just a query. After reading a relatively recent online article on the Nouvel Observateur website about the artist-tramp Marcel Bascoulard from Bourges – whose life was traumatised by his mother shooting his father dead and whose own life ended in his murder for reasons that still appear to be far from clear – I clicked on a link related to the (to me at least) unknown Jean-Paul Clébert (1926–2011), in which I read an obituary of the writer.

As Clébert's daughter Virginie notes below, the photo on the cover is – I find a little confusingly – not of Clébert but of Patrice Molinard. This, his first book, is apparently what surrealists called a 'roman aléatoire', or 'aleatory novel'. This particular edition, though, is from Attila (2009) and based on the 1954 edition, which was published by the Club du meilleur livre, and has been enhanced by the 115 photos by Molinard. Clébert dedicates the book to the photographer Robert Doisneau, the writer Robert Giraud, and Patrice Molinard.

Clébert – until he reached almost thirty – lived the life of a tramp, which made possible the many realistic descriptions in this work, which appears to be the result of numerous scraps of paper such as the backs of cigarette packets and on toilet paper. This no doubt explains the desultory, digressive, repetitive nature of the book, but make no mistake: this makes Orwell's incursions into the world of the tramp look positively weak and even rather silly. But Paris insolite is of its time and obviously a great deal of self-censorship was involved: although the book isn't so much liberally sprinkled with street slang (some inevitably now old-fashioned) as it is stiffened with it in virtually every sentence, the reader is spared any 'strong' language that now gaily adorns many perfectly 'normal' reads. In fact Henry Miller's claim that 'Après avoir lu votre livre, j'ai les tripes remuées' ('After reading your book, my guts turned over') seems a wild exaggeration.

Admittedly, towards the end there's a description of the disinfection of tramps' clothes in which the smell emitting from them being washed reads a little uncomfortably, although – squeamish readers may now wish to skip to the next paragraph – Clébert glides quite smoothly (and non-explicitly) over a paragraph where he says that 'sexual perversion knows no limits'. Here he's talking about the practice of some people dunking pieces of bread into the troughs of vespasiennes: the former men's toilets that have long since been replaced by the sanisettes designed for both sexes. Clébert doesn't even mention what the men did with these soaked pieces of bread a few hours later when they came to collect them, although wouldn't 'gustatory perversion' be more appropriate than 'sexual perversion'? Clébert was no doubt living at a time when these people didn't actually have a name, and although the current Petit Robert, reverso.com and Wiktionnaire don't list the term, I'd previously seen it in a recent online article on Les Inrocks website and promptly verified that this wasn't some kind of joke by checking it out on several other places online: they're called croûtenards.

But let's return to (relative) sanity. I couldn't understand what possessed Clébert – born of a comfortable family – to decide after the war, when he was in his very early twenties, to live among a number of tramps in and around Paris. Initially he says he isn't a tramp, that you have to be over forty and not own a toothbrush to be a tramp, but a little later much more of his truth comes out: freedom is choosing where to live, not throwing your life away working forty-eight hours a week to keep yourself and your family happy. No, that's not living.

And so he chose to live in squalid conditions, very occasionally earning a little money as a métreur-appartments measuring flats and occasionally getting a bite to eat from the tenants but no sexual treats as he had to work with a partner; selling newspapers; and perhaps making a little win on the lottery. He sleeps outside, in squats, flop houses, flea pits, friends' slummy rooms, anywhere he can. He eats unsellable or waste food products from Les Halles and other markets; from dustbins; he scrounges from friends who have a little money; and drinks a great deal, mainly cheap wine in grungy cafés where he can talk to his mates. But he never allows them to think for a second that he's writing a book, as they'd see him as an intellectual, and he doesn't see himself as such; worse still, he's not an existentialist, and he's absolutely categorical about that. He is of course right about concealing the fact that he writes: he'd be torn to pieces if not literally then certainly verbally, and no one would ever be candid with him again. Best just to be as he looks, one of the lads, and there aren't a great number of women in la cloche.

The earthy, honest, largely candid rather than posed photos of Patrice Molinard (taken a few years after Clébert wrote the book) don't merely decorate it but complement it, they often underline the comments that Clébert is making. And even though it was written long before the masses of tourists came, Clébert mentions with scorn the American tourists, along with for instance the bouquinistes who've put up their prices greatly to meet the new money. But essentially of course we are seeing here the flipside of a beautiful city as it was in the late forties: the miserable wooden shacks and houses in la zone, the faubourgs built on wastelands around the old fortifications of Paris; the brothels, and the street-walkers who work for less and less money as they age; the alcoholism, the drinking for the sake of drinking in the bars where the tramps were once welcome and could afford to drink.

Not, certainly, a book to view with nostalgia, but depicted here are Liberté, Egalité, and Fraternité within a world excluded from the tourist, where there are many immigrants – mainly arabs but also Jews and other Europeans – who form a part of the multicultural society within a society where there is not a word mentioned of racism.

A book of rare poetic beauty, a gem.

7 May 2014

Robert Ferguson: Henry Miller: A Life (1991)

Robert Ferguson's Henry Miller is no hagiography: Miller is in general depicted as a person with a huge appetite for sex and with little care for the wives and girlfriends – or children created – that he leaves behind when his love affairs have reached their inevitable final climax.

Henry Miller was addicted not only to sex (especially with much younger women) but also to marriage, and tied a loose knot five times: with Beatrice, June, Lepska, Eve and Hoki, although the final marriage was merely one of convenience and the young Japanese woman had no intention of having sex with an old man, no matter how many gifts he bestowed on her or how many love letters he wrote.

Before, in between – and during – his marriages Miller also made good use of his libido. And he eventually made very good use of his experiences by transmuting them into explosive autobiographical fiction. But for many years – particularly in the thirties when he was in Paris – Miller was just struggling to get by, using his charm and flattery with anyone he met in order to bum money and/or find somewhere to crash for a few nights. But his relatively long and frequently fraught, poverty-stricken relationship with June, which began in America and ended in France, was closed by Anaïs Nin, the wealthy married woman who wouldn't marry him and who came to understand what a bastard he could be.

Inevitably, because Henry Miller's life was frequently distorted by the myth he lent to it by his exaggeration and his outright lies, some of the truth about Miller gets lost, and there has to be some reading between the lines. Towards the end of his life Miller really played to the gallery, and photos of the beautiful young Brenda Venus with her arms around a much older, cloth-capped man, or the same old man playing ping pong with a naked young woman are of course just set up for publicity, an attempt to stretch a legend to places which reality couldn't reach.

George Orwell briefly met the pacifist Miller in Paris on his way to fight in Spain and was told that his action was 'sheer stupidity'. Famously, Orwell wrote about Miller in the essay 'Inside the Whale', in which he sees him insulated against reality by all the blubber around him.

What is surreal is Miller's visit to Eudora Welty in Jackson, Mississippi, having previously informed her that if she needed the money anytime he could 'put her in touch with "an unfailing pornographic market"'. Ferguson says that Miller spent three days with Welty and her mother, although other (surely more credible) sources say her mother refused to see him and that Welty got some male friends together to attempt to entertain him but that he didn't seem interested in anything – plus, he wasn't at all interesting.

What is real, as Ferguson points out, is Henry Miller's influence on other writers. He mentions the admiration of Norman Mailer, Saul Bellow, John Updike and James Baldwin for such attributes as 'the courage and honesty of his sexual writing'. The Beat writers, on the other hand, were also attracted to his anti-Americanism, anti-materialism and his appreciation of eastern religions.

I've only ever read Tropic of Cancer and the very different novella The Smile at the Foot of the Ladder, but what now interests me is re-reading Cancer, and probably Tropic of Capricorn too, in the light of what Ferguson has shed on them being romans à clef.

4 September 2013

George Orwell in Hampstead and Canonbury

3 Pond Street, Hampstead, now a Pain Quotidien outlet.
 
'GEORGE ORWELL
WRITER 1903..1950
LIVED AND WORKED IN
A BOOKSHOP ON THIS SITE
1934..1935..'
 
The bookshop was Booklovers' Corner run by Francis and Myfanwy Westrope. Orwell used his experience here for parts of his novel Keep the Aspidistra Flying (1936). He wrote about his time at Booklovers' Corner in the essay 'Bookshop Memories' (1936). Unfortunately, vandals have chipped off Orwell's face on the plaque.
 
Orwell was forced to move out of Pond Road early in 1935, and came to a flat here, 77 Parliament Hill, next to Hampstead Heath.
 
'GEORGE ORWELL
1903–1950
WRITER
LIVED HERE'
 
In June 1935 he moved to Kentish Town (see my link at the bottom).
 
And many years later, in Canonbury Square, Canonbury, Islington:
 
'GEORGE
ORWELL
1903–1950
NOVELIST & ESSAYIST
LIVED AT 27B
1945'
 
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
George Orwell: 'Bookshop Memories'
George Orwell in Kentish Town

17 June 2013

Julian Maclaren-Ross: Of Love and Hunger (1947)

Julian Maclaren-Ross (1912–64) is one of that slightly contradictory group of writers – both obscure and well known. Many readers are aware of him in a secondhand fashion, in the pastiche of Maclaren-Ross as X Trapnel in Anthony Powell's Books Do Furnish a Room (1970). But quite recently this novel was incorporated into the Penguin Classics canon with J. D. Taylor's eight-page Introduction to this dandyish, hard-drinking, impecunious, self-destructive inhabitant of the drinking dens of Fitzrovia. As he died at the relatively young age of 52, Maclaren-Ross was too young to have attained the status of 'national treasure' or, conversely, to have disgraced himself by embracing conformity in old age; so, fuelled by photographic images of his handsome features, his malacca cane and his cigarette holder, he has developed a kind of cult status, and in 2006 his formerly unmarked grave in Paddington was furnished with a headstone by a group of admirers led by Virginia Ironside.

Of Love and Hunger doesn't have a complicated plot: it portrays the life of a heavy-drinking, heavy-smoking vacuum cleaner salesman chasing door-to-door demonstrations (or 'dems' – which would no doubt be called 'leads' today) and falling foul of the cut-throat nature of the work. Inadvertently he is sucked in by the powers of Sukie, the rather capricious would-be femme fatale who is the wife of his friend and colleague Roper. But in the end the increasingly black clouds of war bring a silver lining in the form of a 'respectable' job for Captain Fanshawe, who is getting married to the reliable, loving Jackie Mowbray. The complexity of the novel is in the network of subsidiary characters, some of whom have bit parts, often supplying humorous diversions, such as Larry Heliotrope who survives the system largely by conning his way through it; or Sukie's unnamed landlady sticking her ear to the keyhole when Fanshawe visits her; or Barnes, who spends more time in and out of the pubs than selling vacuum cleaners, etc.

Of Love and Hunger evokes a number of books, either coincidentally or deliberately: the title is from Auden and MacNeice's 'Letter to Lord Byron' in their Letters from Iceland (1937); the title, the context of poverty and the frequent telegraphic styles recall Lionel Britton's Hunger and Love (1931); this world is redolent of Patrick Hamilton's boarding house novels, and the doomed love affair to a certain extent reminds us of Hamilton's The Midnight Bell (1929); Frank Tilsley's The Plebian's Progress (1933) painfully highlights the twilight world of the vacuum cleaner salesman; Orwell's Keep the Aspidistra Flying (1936) concerns the deadening effect of conformity and has a background of poverty (a kind of retribution for those who don't conform), Coming Up for Air (1939) has conformity in a pre-war setting as a major theme, and then there's the coincidence of Orwell and Fanshawe's background in India. D. J. Taylor mentions Hemingway's pared-down style in passing, but in addition there's a vague, general American cultural influence running through the book. Highly interesting for comparison to and contrast with this novel are the depictions of lives of salesmen in two  later plays: Arthur Miller's Death of a Salesman (1949) and David Mamet's Glengarry Glen Ross (1984).

Frank Tilsley is perhaps of particular interest here, not only in his representation of vacuum cleaner selling, but as a counterpoint to Of Love and Hunger's representations of class and sexual behaviour: Tilsley came from the working class and several of his novels form part of the (more obscure) working-class canon, although Maclaren-Ross wasn't working class and Fanshawe and Sukie don't align themselves with the politics of the left but identify more with the apolitical 'misfit' as Sukie terms it; and whereas Of Love and Hunger is very coy in its portrayals of extra- and pre-marital sex, Tilsley's allusions to sex (particularly to contraception) in The Plebeian's Progress and She Was There Too (1938) are bolder, no doubt largely because they are within socially approved marital parameters.

9 March 2013

George Orwell in Hayes, Middlesex

 
'GEORGE
ORWELL
(ERIC ARTHUR BLAIR)
1903–1950
 
Lived and Worked Here As
Senior Master Of The Former
HAWTHORNE HIGH SCHOOL
FOR BOYS
April 1932–July 1933
 
Hayes Literary Society'

The school at 116-18 Church Road, Hayes, had about twenty boys and there was only one other teacher, who was younger than Blair. It was during his time teaching here that his first book, Down and Out in Paris in London, was published (in January 1933), when he was working on Burmese Days. He thought Hayes a 'God-forsaken' place, and his next (and last) teaching place was Frays College in Uxbridge, Middlesex, which he left in January 1934 on the grounds of bad health.

The George Orwell pub in Coldharbour Lane, Hayes, previously called the Famous George Orwell, is now closed, as indicated by the boarded up lower windows partly visible here. Previously it had belonged to the Wetherspoon group and named the Moon Under Water after a short essay Orwell wrote about his ideal, and obviously non-existent, pub.

27 November 2012

George Orwell in Kentish Town: London #42

 
'GEORGE
ORWELL
1903–1950
Novelist and
Political Essayist
lived here'
 
For a few months in the second half of 1935 George Orwell, either at the suggestion of A. R. Orage (according to Michael Sayers) or Mabel Fierz (according to Michael Shelden) moved into the top part of 50 Lawford Road, Kentish Town, with Sayers and Rayner Heppenstall.* Orwell had the largest bedroom because he paid the largest part of the rent. He got on well with Sayers, but on one occasion Heppenstall – who could be a rather difficult character, Fierz later claimed – came in very drunk and provoked Orwell to thump him on the nose and attack him with a shooting stick. The following morning Orwell (in whose name the property was let) ordered that Heppenstall pack and go. Although the two made good their differences a year later later, Heppenstall had the last word five years after Orwell's death by writing an article called 'The Shooting Stick'.

*Gordon Bowker, 'Michael Sayers: Writer Whose Career Never Recovered from Being Blacklisted in the United States', Independent, 22 July 2010; Michael Shelden, Orwell: The Authorised Biography (London: Heinemann, 1991).

16 August 2011

George Orwell, Lionel Britton, and 'The Proletarian Writer'

For a number of years now the transcript of 'The Proletarian Writer' – Desmond Hawkins's Home Service radio interview with George Orwell on 6 December 1940 – has been available in Peter Davison's A Patriot After All: 1940–1941, but I've only just noticed it online. As I've mentioned this in several posts before, I won't dwell on it again, except to repeat that it's very interesting how affected Orwell was by Lionel Britton's Hunger and Love: almost ten years after publication he's still talking about it, even calling it an 'exceptional book'. It seems hardly surprising, then, to find echoes of Britton in – for example – Keep the Aspidistra Flying and Coming Up for Air.

The transcript is here.

30 April 2010

Coventry Patmore, 1984, and Percy Street, Fitzrovia: Literary London #6

This blue plaque remembers that the poet and essayist Coventry Patmore (1823-96) lived here - at 14 Percy Street - from 1863 to 1894, a stay perhaps so brief because of outside noise disturbing his concentration. Patmore is best known for his poem sequence The Angel in the House (1854-63).Now the Soho Wine Store at 18 Percy Street, this is where Sonia Brownwell, later to be George Orwell's second wife, lived in a flat in the 1940s. He modeled the place Winston and Julia used to share their secret meetings in 1984 on this place.

29 August 2008

George Orwell and Lionel Britton

In the April 1931 issue of The Adelphi George Orwell (who at the time was writing under his real name Eric Blair) reviewed Lionel Britton’s first (and only published) novel Hunger and Love at some length. He calls the book ‘entirely sound’ as a ‘social document’, but fails to recognize it as a novel as such: it is more of ‘a kind of monologue on poverty’.(1) Although (among other things) Orwell found the repetitions annoying, the novel made a lasting impression on him.(2)

In a Home Service radio broadcast in 1940, Orwell specifically singles out Hunger and Love — with some reservations — as ‘an outstanding book’ of the sub-genre. It is remarkable that he remembers the book so vividly from when he reviewed it almost ten years previously. Unfortunately, Loraine Saunders's new book mentions nothing of this, citing almost entirely negative things that Orwell says about Hunger and Love, (although she at least acknowledges that it's significant that Britton's 'uniquely modernist style' didn't appeal to Orwell).(3)

There is a strong case for arguing that Lionel Britton had an influence of Orwell’s work; Keep the Aspidistra Flying (1936) has a number of moments which could easily have been inspired by Britton, and the example below from Coming Up for Air (1939) seems to bear the distinct hallmark of Britton’s writing: the enumeration, the conspiracy theory and the sense of urgency all suggest a pastiche of Britton’s Hunger and Love:

‘And all the soul-savers and Nosey Parkers, the people whom you’ve never seen but who rule your destiny all the same, the Home Secretary, Scotland Yard, the Temperance League, the Bank of England, Lord Beaverbrook, Hitler and Stalin on a tandem bicycle, the bench of Bishops, Mussolini, the Pope — they were all of them after me. I could almost hear them shouting:

There’s a chap who thinks he’s going to escape! There’s a chap who says he won’t be streamlined! He’s going back to Lower Binfield! After him! Stop him!’.(4)

(1) The Complete Works of George Orwell, ed. by Peter Davison, 20 vols (London: Secker & Warburg, 1986–1998; rev. and updated 2000), A Patriot After All: 1940–1941, pp. 203–05. (Originally published as ‘Poverty — Plain and Coloured’ by ‘Eric Blair’, Adelphi, April 1931, pp. 80–82.)


(2) Orwell was, of course, soon to publish the non-fictional Down and Out in Paris and London, and would have been particularly interested in Britton‘s account of poverty in the capital.

(3) Loraine Saunders, The Unsung Artistry of George Orwell: The Novels from "Burmese Days" to "Nineteen Eighty-Four" (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2008), pp. 10–11.

(4) George Orwell, Coming up for Air (London: Gollancz, 1939; repr. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1962), pp. 173–74.