Category Archives: Literature

Washington Irving’s The Legend Of Sleepy Hollow (1820)

Well, Hal­loween is com­ing round again so I thought it time­ly to write about a com­pi­la­tion of creepy tales that I have recent­ly fin­ished read­ing by the 19th cen­tu­ry Amer­i­can short-sto­ry writer Wash­ing­ton Irv­ing (1783–1859). If you are unfa­mil­iar with the author, you may be more famil­iar with the titles of two of his more famous sto­ries: Rip Van Win­kle (1819) and The Leg­end of Sleepy Hol­low (1820). He was one of the first Amer­i­can writ­ers to earn acclaim in Europe, and he was admired by the likes of Lord Byron, Charles Dick­ens, Mary Shel­ley and Wal­ter Scott.

Irv­ing had more strings to his bow than just short sto­ry writ­ing: he was a diplo­mat, serv­ing as Amer­i­can ambas­sador to Spain in the 1840s, and a his­to­ri­an, respon­si­ble for sev­er­al his­to­ries of 15th-cen­tu­ry Spain. This no doubt explains why sev­er­al of Irving’s sto­ries are set in and around Grana­da and involve ghost­ly encoun­ters in places like the Alham­bra Palace with long-gone Moors from before the Recon­quista. Many oth­er sto­ries, on the oth­er hand, are set deep inside anoth­er area close to Irving’s heart, rur­al New York State includ­ing the Catskill Moun­tains (where Rip Van Win­kle is set) and the bucol­ic envi­rons of mod­ern-day Tar­ry­town on the Hud­son riv­er (where The Leg­end of Sleepy Hol­low is set and where, in fact, Irv­ing would end his days).

The Leg­end of Sleepy Hol­low sto­ry revolves around local school­mas­ter Ich­a­bod Crane and his com­pe­ti­tion with town alpha-male “Brom Bones” for the hand of beau­ti­ful heiress Kat­ri­na van Tas­sel. The super­nat­ur­al ele­ment to the sto­ry, how­ev­er, is pro­vid­ed by local leg­end which has it that a Hes­s­ian sol­dier who was decap­i­tat­ed by a can­non­ball in bat­tle still roams the area as a Head­less Horse­man. Irv­ing was by no means the first to invoke the motif of the head­less horse­man – they have appeared in numer­ous sto­ries from Gael­ic, Scan­di­na­vian and Ger­man folk­lore, for exam­ple – but Irving’s is the one that has res­onat­ed down the ages, right down to Tim Burton’s (some­what lib­er­ty-tak­ing) movie of 1999, Sleepy Hol­low.

Ichabod’s encounter with the head­less horse­man hap­pens after his rejec­tion by Kat­ri­na at the van Tas­sel house­hold and he is return­ing home, crest­fall­en, on a bor­rowed horse, Gun­pow­der. Pass­ing though a men­ac­ing swamp, he sees a cloaked rid­er and is hor­ri­fied to see that the rider’s head was not on his shoul­ders but in his sad­dle. A fren­zied race ensues as Ich­a­bod rides for his life, des­per­ate­ly goad­ing Gun­pow­der down the Hol­low; as they cross a bridge, Ich­a­bod turns back in ter­ror to see the head­less rid­er rear his horse and hurl his sev­ered head direct­ly at him: the mis­sile strikes Ich­a­bod and sends him tum­bling head­long into the dust. The fol­low­ing morn­ing, Gun­pow­der is found chomp­ing at the grass, with the only sign of Ich­a­bod, who is nev­er seen again, being his dis­card­ed hat along­side a mys­te­ri­ous shat­tered pump­kin…

Wash­ing­ton Irv­ing

Johann Wolfgang von Goethe’s Faust (1808)

Johann Wolf­gang von Goethe’s great trag­ic play, Faust (1808), tells the noto­ri­ous tale of Dr Faust and his deal with the Dev­il, a theme that we see recur­ring in West­ern art and lit­er­a­ture time and time again. Dr Faust is the learned Ger­man schol­ar who is dis­il­lu­sioned by his inabil­i­ty to dis­cov­er life’s true mean­ing despite his mas­tery of the sci­ences and the tra­di­tion­al and con­ven­tion­al modes of thought. In des­per­a­tion, he con­sid­ers resort­ing to the arts of mag­ic to resolve his frus­tra­tion, and this attracts the atten­tion of the demon Mephistophe­les who will tempt Faust into sign­ing a con­tract in blood: a life­time of the Devil’s servi­tude in exchange for Faust’s immor­tal soul.

There’s plen­ty to unpack here and sev­er­al inter­est­ing avenues we can go down. First of all, what of this epony­mous char­ac­ter, Dr Faust? Well, he was based upon a real per­son, one Johann Georg Faust (c.1480 – c.1540), who was an obscure Ger­man itin­er­ant alchemist, astrologer, and magi­cian. In the decades fol­low­ing his death, he became the sub­ject of folk leg­end, trans­mit­ted in so-called chap­books, begin­ning in the 1580s. Chap­books, rather than being books for chaps (at least, not exclu­sive­ly), were actu­al­ly short, low-bud­get street lit­er­a­ture that were very pop­u­lar with the pub­lic through­out Europe (this was before Water­stones).

The leg­end of Faust was seized upon long before Goethe: Christo­pher Mar­lowe adapt­ed the per­sona into his play The Trag­i­cal His­to­ry of the Life and Death of Doc­tor Faus­tus in 1604, and the Faust­buch brand of chap­book sur­vived through­out the ear­ly mod­ern peri­od. Thus, when Goethe wrote Faust, he was drama­tis­ing a long-estab­lished tra­di­tion.

How about the char­ac­ter of Mephistophe­les? Here too, we find Mephistophe­les appear­ing for the first time in the ear­ly Faust­buchs; he is not the Dev­il him­self but a demon work­ing on behalf of the Dev­il, and in fact, since he was invent­ed by the anony­mous author(s) of the Faust­buch, he is sole­ly a lit­er­ary char­ac­ter and doesn’t form part of the tra­di­tion­al hier­ar­chy of demonolo­gy. In Goethe’s hands he is not only cold-heart­ed and cyn­i­cal, as you’d expect, but also supreme­ly wit­ty, and has all the best lines (hence we are remind­ed of the mod­ern-day obser­va­tion that “the Dev­il has the best tunes”).

And the deal itself? The dev­il and his fiendish temp­ta­tions have been a lit­er­ary sta­ple ever since Eve bit the prover­bial apple, and mankind has always been grim­ly fas­ci­nat­ed by the trope of trad­ing one’s soul for wealth or super­hu­man pow­ers, from Oscar Wilde’s The Pic­ture of Dori­an Gray to Ter­ry Gilliam’s The Imag­i­nar­i­um of Dr Par­nas­sus. In the case of Goethe’s Faust, the whole is a sym­bol­ic and panoram­ic com­men­tary on the human con­di­tion, writ­ten in verse through­out, and a clas­sic of Euro­pean lit­er­a­ture. To the Dev­il his due…

Eugène Delacroix, Faust and Mephistophe­les
Goethe

 

P G Wodehouse’s Carry On, Jeeves (1925)

PG (Sir Pel­ham Grenville) Wode­house (1881–1975) was an Eng­lish author who was one of the most wide­ly read humourists of the 20th cen­tu­ry. A pro­lif­ic writer through­out his life, Wode­house pub­lished more than nine­ty books and would often have two or more books on the go at any one time. His prose style and sub­ject mat­ter was light and breezy and, in his own words, he want­ed to spread “sweet­ness and light”. Just look at those titles: Noth­ing Seri­ous, Laugh­ing Gas, Joy in the Morn­ing. With every sparkling joke, every gen­tly inno­cent char­ac­ter, and every far­ci­cal tus­sle, all set in an ide­alised world of the 1920s and 30s, Wode­house whisks us far away from our wor­ries.

He had many fans among the great and the good, includ­ing for­mer British prime min­is­ters and many of his fel­low writ­ers such as George Orwell and Eve­lyn Waugh; I seem to remem­ber read­ing that Lem­my of Motor­head used to read him on his tour bus, post-gig! Although Wode­house wrote sev­er­al series of books about var­i­ous char­ac­ters such as the Bland­ings Cas­tle set, the unruf­flable mon­o­cle-wear­ing Old Eton­ian Psmith (with a silent P), and the tall-tale-telling Mr Mulliner, most peo­ple will know him for the com­ic cre­ations, Jeeves and Woost­er.

Bertie Woost­er is the mon­eyed young toff who cares lit­tle about any­thing oth­er than fash­ion­able socks, frip­pery, and top­hole soci­etal high jinks, whilst Jeeves is the saga­cious valet who clear­ly has the brains that Bertie lacks and who steers his mas­ter through many a social storm. The Jeeves canon con­sists of 35 short sto­ries and 11 nov­els, and a won­der­ful start­ing point is 1925’s col­lec­tion of ten short sto­ries, Car­ry On, Jeeves.

My own intro­duc­tion to Wode­house, like many peo­ple, was the 1990s TV series Jeeves and Woost­er, with Hugh Lau­rie as Bertie and Stephen Fry as Jeeves. Jeeves and Woost­er was a week­ly escape into a jazz-age won­der­land of art-deco apart­ments, pan­elled gentlemen’s clubs, “tis­sue-restor­ing” cock­tails and buf­fet break­fasts, all serv­ing as a back­drop to a series of predica­ments for Bertie from which he would invari­ably be extri­cat­ed by Jeeves. The dra­ma was always held togeth­er by fizzing dia­logue, pep­pered with bons mots and not a few neol­o­gisms from Wodehouse’s pen.

As befit­ting a man whose char­ac­ters and sit­u­a­tions had such light­ness of being, Wode­house didn’t take him­self too seri­ous­ly either, as this rejoin­der to a crit­ic below shows:

A cer­tain crit­ic — for such men, I regret to say, do exist — made the nasty remark about my last nov­el that it con­tained ‘all the old Wode­house char­ac­ters under dif­fer­ent names’…he will not be able to make a sim­i­lar charge against Sum­mer Light­ning. With my supe­ri­or intel­li­gence, I have out-gen­er­alled the man this time by putting in all the old Wode­house char­ac­ters under the same names. Pret­ty sil­ly it will make him feel, I rather fan­cy.”

Here’s a typ­i­cal scene from the TV series where­in Bertie finds him­self embroiled in a secret love tri­an­gle in high dan­ger of immi­nent expo­sure and it’s down to Jeeves to pull off a suit­ably clever res­cue.

P G Wode­house

HG Wells’s The War Of The Worlds (1898)

HG (Her­bert George) Wells (1866–1946) was a pro­lif­ic writer with more than fifty nov­els and dozens of short sto­ries to his name. His out­put was an eclec­tic mix, includ­ing works of social com­men­tary, pol­i­tics, his­to­ry, pop­u­lar sci­ence, satire, biog­ra­phy, and futur­ism (he fore­saw the advent of air­craft, tanks, space trav­el, nuclear weapons, satel­lite tele­vi­sion and some­thing akin to the World Wide Web) – but of course what he is best remem­bered for is his sci­ence fic­tion, fol­low­ing the remark­able rapid-fire pub­li­ca­tion over a four-year peri­od of instant clas­sics The Time Machine (1895), The Island of Doc­tor More­au (1896), The Invis­i­ble Man (1897), and The War of the Worlds (1898).

The War of the Worlds is one of the ear­li­est sto­ries to detail a con­flict between mankind and an extra-ter­res­tri­al race. It presents itself as a fac­tu­al account of a Mar­t­ian inva­sion as wit­nessed by the nar­ra­tor. You know the plot: appar­ent mete­ors have rained down around the narrator’s home town of Wok­ing (through which I trav­elled by train recent­ly, prompt­ing me to make a men­tal note to write this very blog), but which of course turn out to be far from inor­gan­ic space rock, but instead very much not-friend­ly space aliens bent on destroy­ing human­i­ty.

The first edi­tion was illus­trat­ed by British artist War­wick Gob­le: inky, black-and-white depic­tions that were eerie, imag­i­na­tive, excit­ing, and thor­ough­ly of their late Vic­to­ri­an time. Lat­er, in 1906, the French edi­tions were illus­trat­ed by the Brazil­ian artist Hen­rique Alvim Cor­rêa, which turned out to be some­thing of an upgrade, adding to the evo­ca­tion of Wells’ imag­ined crea­tures and their ves­sels, and of which Wells him­self might­i­ly approved.

The War of the Worlds has spawned half a dozen fea­ture films and tele­vi­sion series, a record album and musi­cal show (Jeff Wayne, of course), but per­haps the most impact­ful drama­ti­sa­tion came in the 1938 radio pro­gramme direct­ed by and star­ring Orson Welles. It was very much played for real and if you hap­pened to miss the intro­duc­to­ry mono­logue – which thou­sands of lis­ten­ers did – you could be for­giv­en for think­ing the dra­ma was a live news­cast of devel­op­ing events. The pro­gramme famous­ly cre­at­ed wide­spread pan­ic with hordes of peo­ple believ­ing that  a real-life Mar­t­ian inva­sion was under­way right then in North Amer­i­ca (Welles had swapped out Wok­ing for Grover’s Mill, New Jer­sey). It’s easy to scoff at the mass cred­u­lous­ness of the pub­lic, but you decide: here’s a clip of the broad­cast. Might you have believed it, too?

HG Wells

Plato’s Allegory Of The Cave (c.375 BC)

Any­one who has stud­ied phi­los­o­phy to any rea­son­able degree will be famil­iar with the “Father” of phi­los­o­phy, Pla­to (c.428–348 BC). Along with this teacher, Socrates, and his stu­dent, Aris­to­tle, Pla­to under­pins the canon of ancient Greek phi­los­o­phy and, descend­ing from that, the entire his­to­ry of West­ern and Mid­dle East­ern phi­los­o­phy to this day. Alfred North White­head summed up Plato’s endur­ing influ­ence by char­ac­ter­is­ing the whole of sub­se­quent phi­los­o­phy as “a series of foot­notes to Pla­to”.

Pla­to inno­vat­ed the so-called dialec­tic method of rea­son­ing by way of dia­logues between two or more char­ac­ters (one of them often being his old teacher Socrates him­self) in order to tease out the truth about some­thing. Plato’s Socrates turns many an inter­locu­tor on his head with his acute rea­son­ing, and he’s also a dab hand with alle­gories: his most famous being found in Plato’s Repub­lic and known as the Alle­go­ry of the Cave.

In this alle­go­ry Socrates describes a group of pris­on­ers who live their lives chained to the wall of a cave, and fac­ing a blank wall. The pris­on­ers see only shad­ows pro­ject­ed on the wall by objects pass­ing in front of a fire behind them. The shad­ows are the pris­on­ers’ real­i­ty, but are not accu­rate rep­re­sen­ta­tions of the real world; they are mere­ly frag­ments of real­i­ty. Socrates explains that a philoso­pher is one who seeks to under­stand and per­ceive the high­er lev­els of real­i­ty and is like the pris­on­er who is freed from the cave and who comes to under­stand that the shad­ows on the wall are not the direct source of the images seen.

There is a thread run­ning between this ancient alle­go­ry right up to mod­ern times as sci­ence grap­ples with the fun­da­men­tal make­up of real­i­ty and the pos­si­bil­i­ty of high­er dimen­sions but we needn’t tax our­selves with such deep mat­ters right now. Instead, enjoy this excel­lent clay ani­ma­tion short which sum­maris­es the alle­go­ry nice­ly and is the work of writer and direc­tor Michael Ram­say, clay­ma­tion artist John Grigs­by and voice actor Kristo­pher Hut­son.

Pla­to’s Cave

Rudyard Kipling’s Rikki-Tikki-Tavi (1894)

As a child of the six­ties, I was exposed to that great 1967 Dis­ney clas­sic, The Jun­gle Book; I remem­ber being tak­en to the cin­e­ma to watch it and at the end, as the cred­its rolled, I begged to stay and watch Mowgli, Baloo and Shere Khan all over again (I seem to remem­ber we’d been a bit late and missed the first few min­utes so I built my jus­ti­fi­ca­tion upon that; it didn’t work). Mean­while, at school, a copy of the book on which the film was based was a sta­ple of the class book­case: Rud­yard Kipling’s The Jun­gle Book. Most of the short sto­ries must have been read out to us at one time or anoth­er but one in par­tic­u­lar stands out in my mem­o­ry: the tale of Rik­ki-Tik­ki-Tavi.

Rik­ki-Tik­ki-Tavi, so named for his chat­ter­ing vocal sounds, was a young Indi­an grey mon­goose who befriends an Eng­lish fam­i­ly resid­ing in India. He gets to know the oth­er crea­tures inhab­it­ing the gar­den and is warned of the cobras Nag and Nagaina (names per­haps inspir­ing J K Rowl­ing to choose, years lat­er, the name Nagi­ni for Voldemort’s snake), who are angered by the human fam­i­ly’s pres­ence in their ter­ri­to­ry and seek to kill them

Accord­ing­ly, Nag enters the house­’s bath­room before dawn to kill the humans, but Rik­ki attacks Nag from behind in the dark­ness. The ensu­ing strug­gle awak­ens the fam­i­ly, and the father kills Nag with a shot­gun blast while Rik­ki bites down on the hood of the strug­gling male cobra. The griev­ing female snake Nagaina attempts revenge against the humans, cor­ner­ing them as they have break­fast on a veran­da, but again Rik­ki saves the day, pur­su­ing Nagaina to her under­ground nest where an unseen final bat­tle takes place. Rik­ki emerges tri­umphant from the hole, and ded­i­cates his life to guard­ing the gar­den.

The sto­ries in The Jun­gle Book were inspired in part by ancient Indi­an fable texts such as the Pan­chatantra and the Jata­ka tales, and indeed there is a sim­i­lar mon­goose and snake ver­sion of the Rik­ki-Tik­ki-Tavi sto­ry found in Book 5 of Pan­chatantra. Kipling’s “beast tales” were thus the revival of an old tra­di­tion, with Kipling’s own spin gleaned from his expe­ri­ences grow­ing up in India for the first five years of his life (and with a hearty dol­lop of aban­don­ment issues, per­haps, after Kipling was sent back to Eng­land for an unhap­py peri­od, but that’s anoth­er sto­ry). Here are the open­ing lines to the sto­ry.

THIS is the sto­ry of the great war that Rik­ki-tik­ki-tavi fought sin­gle-hand­ed, through the bath-rooms of the big bun­ga­low in Segowlee can­ton­ment. Darzee, the tai­lor-bird, helped him, and Chuchun­dra, the muskrat, who nev­er comes out into the mid­dle of the floor, but always creeps round by the wall, gave him advice; but Rik­ki-tik­ki did the real fight­ing.

He was a mon­goose, rather like a lit­tle cat in his fur and his tail, but quite like a weasel in his head and his habits. His eyes and the end of his rest­less nose were pink; he could scratch him­self any­where he pleased, with any leg, front or back, that he chose to use; he could fluff up his tail till it looked like a bot­tle-brush, and his war-cry as he scut­tled through the long grass, was: “Rikk-tikk-tik­ki-tik­ki-tchk!

One day, a high sum­mer flood washed him out of the bur­row where he lived with his father and moth­er, and car­ried him, kick­ing and cluck­ing, down a road­side ditch. He found a lit­tle wisp of grass float­ing there, and clung to it till he lost his sens­es. When he revived, he was lying in the hot sun on the mid­dle of a gar­den path, very drag­gled indeed, and a small boy was say­ing: “Here’s a dead mon­goose. Let’s have a funer­al.”

“No,” said his moth­er; “let’s take him in and dry him. Per­haps he isn’t real­ly dead.”

They took him into the house, and a big man picked him up between his fin­ger and thumb and said he was not dead but half choked; so they wrapped him in cot­ton-wool, and warmed him, and he opened his eyes and sneezed.

“Now,” said the big man (he was an Eng­lish­man who had just moved into the bun­ga­low); “don’t fright­en him, and we’ll see what he’ll do.”

It is the hard­est thing in the world to fright­en a mon­goose, because he is eat­en up from nose to tail with curios­i­ty. The mot­to of all the mon­goose fam­i­ly is, “Run and find out”; and Rik­ki-tik­ki was a true mon­goose. He looked at the cot­ton-wool, decid­ed that it was not good to eat, ran all round the table, sat up and put his fur in order, scratched him­self, and jumped on the small boy’s shoul­der.

“Don’t be fright­ened, Ted­dy,” said his father. “That’s his way of mak­ing friends.”

“Ouch! He’s tick­ling under my chin,” said Ted­dy.

Rik­ki-tik­ki looked down between the boy’s col­lar and neck, snuffed at his ear, and climbed down to the floor, where he sat rub­bing his nose.

Rik­ki-Tik­ki-Tavi book cov­er
Rud­yard Kipling

Isaac Asimov’s I, Robot (1950)

A few blogs back I wrote about the fan­ta­sy world of Ursu­la K Le Guin and recalled the appeal of brows­ing the array of sci­ence fic­tion book cov­ers on the shelves at WH Smith’s. One of the giants of that genre – and one that I actu­al­ly went to the trou­ble of read­ing – was Isaac Asi­mov.

Born in Smolen­sk in 1920, Asi­mov was the son of Jew­ish par­ents who emi­grat­ed to the US in 1923, and the young Isaac was brought up in Brook­lyn, New York, where he helped his father run a sweet shop (a “can­dy store”, I sup­pose). It was there that he was first exposed to the clas­sic Amaz­ing Sto­ries mag­a­zines that his father also stocked, and he was soon div­ing into the fan­tas­tic worlds of Jules Verne and Edgar Allan Poe, and writ­ing short sto­ries of his own.

Although Asimov’s writ­ing career for many years played sec­ond fid­dle to his pro­fes­sion­al sci­en­tif­ic career (he became a lec­tur­er and pro­fes­sor of bio­chem­istry at Boston Uni­ver­si­ty), his out­put of sci­ence fic­tion was nonethe­less prodi­gious, and even­tu­al­ly the glut of ideas and the suc­cess of his writ­ing encour­aged him to become a full-time author. My expo­sure to Isaac Asi­mov came in the form of his Robot series, notably I, Robot, which my mem­o­ry tells me I inher­it­ed, rather than bought, prob­a­bly from my Uncle Geoff.

Asi­mov wrote 37 short sto­ries and six nov­els about robots and in fact had coined the term “robot­ics” in a 1941 sto­ry. He also came up with his famous and influ­en­tial “Three Laws of Robot­ics”:

  1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inac­tion, allow a human being to come to harm.
  2. A robot must obey the orders giv­en to it by human beings, except where such orders would con­flict with the First Law.
  3. A robot must pro­tect its own exis­tence as long as such pro­tec­tion does not con­flict with the First or Sec­ond Laws.

These Three Laws of Robot­ics, which Asimov‘s robots were sup­posed to obey, have resound­ed down the ages to the present day when the mod­ern pre­oc­cu­pa­tion with arti­fi­cial intel­li­gence toys with the idea that those laws might be breached, as they clear­ly were in The Ter­mi­na­tor!

Here’s a selec­tion of book cov­ers that gave many an illus­tra­tor free rein to por­tray Asimov’s robot­ic world, and start­ing with the bril­liant Ter­mi­na­tor-like cov­er that I remem­ber hav­ing.

Isaac Asi­mov

Jack Kerouac’s On The Road (1957)

Back in late 1987 I set off back­pack­ing around the world for sev­er­al months, a most amaz­ing expe­ri­ence that I could write a lot about but won’t as the point I want­ed to make was that trav­el­ling presents a mul­ti­tude of oppor­tu­ni­ties to read books. In the back of the jour­nal I was keep­ing, I list­ed all the books that I had been read­ing along the way, on bus­es, in hotel rooms, and on the beach, and it’s inter­est­ing to me to review that list as I peruse it now. I’m quite impressed: I see some clas­sics of the dystopi­an genre (Orwell, Hux­ley, Kaf­ka), some great Amer­i­can lit­er­a­ture (Hem­ing­way, John Irv­ing, Joseph Heller, Kurt Von­negut), some stars of Brit Lit (Gra­ham Greene, G K Chester­ton, John Fowles, William Gold­ing), and of course there had to be a clas­sic about trav­el and freedom…and that clas­sic was Jack Kerouac’s On The Road.

On the Road was based on Kerouac’s trav­els with his bud­dies across the Unit­ed States in the late 1940s. Being a vora­cious writer, Ker­ouac had chan­nelled reams of stream-of-con­scious­ness nar­ra­tive (he called it “spon­ta­neous prose”) into mul­ti­ple note­books and then spent a three-week peri­od in April 1951 copy­ing them all out into one long reel of writ­ing; it would even­tu­al­ly be pub­lished in 1957 and become one of the great Amer­i­can nov­els of the 20th cen­tu­ry, the crown­ing glo­ry of the bur­geon­ing Beat move­ment.

The nov­el is a roman à clef, mean­ing that, whilst its sto­ry and char­ac­ters rep­re­sent real events and peo­ple, it is writ­ten with a façade of fic­tion, and his bud­dies (William S. Bur­roughs, Allen Gins­berg, Neal Cas­sady, them­selves key fig­ures of the Beat Gen­er­a­tion) appear as fic­tion­al char­ac­ters, with Ker­ouac him­self cast as the novel’s nar­ra­tor Sal Par­adise. The plot is cen­tred around sev­er­al road trips that the pro­tag­o­nists under­go, and the chaot­ic adven­tures they expe­ri­ence.

The nar­ra­tive is full of Amer­i­cana which appeals to my roman­tic side (indeed, it was the image of the Wichi­ta lines­man in my last blog that got me think­ing about On The Road in the first place). We read about long roads and high­ways, Cadil­lacs and Ford Sedans, cheap motels and Skid Row, night­clubs and bars, jazz and poet­ry, drugs and bor­del­los, and along the way get acquaint­ed with for­ties New York, San Fran­cis­co, New Orleans, Chica­go and St Louis and a myr­i­ad oth­er towns and cities of Amer­i­ca.

Although my own trav­el jour­nal remains lit­tle more than a log of events, of inter­est only to me, Kerouac’s jour­nals turned into a tour de force of lit­er­a­ture and a fas­ci­nat­ing insight into Amer­i­ca’s coun­ter­cul­ture.

Jack Ker­ouac

Marcel Proust’s In Search Of Lost Time (1913)

In Search of Lost Time (French: À la recherche du temps per­du) is a mon­u­men­tal nov­el in sev­en vol­umes by French author Mar­cel Proust, writ­ten between 1909 and the author’s death in 1922. Weigh­ing in at 3200 pages, it real­ly is a mag­num opus and indeed was Proust’s life’s work (his only oth­er nov­el, the ear­li­er Jean San­teuil, was unfin­ished and was some­thing of a pro­to­type since it con­tained many of the themes and motifs that he would deploy lat­er). So, has your blog­ger gone above and beyond and read the whole thing? Of course not! How­ev­er, I have recent­ly read vol­ume one, Swann’s Way, and judg­ing by the qual­i­ty of writ­ing and the enjoy­able way I was sucked into his world, who knows, I may yet attempt the whole series, in time.

My ver­sion is in Eng­lish of course, rather than the orig­i­nal French, and so a word should be said about the qual­i­ty of the trans­la­tion. This defin­i­tive trans­la­tion was ren­dered by Scots­man C K Scott Mon­crieff whose job it was to use the appro­pri­ate phrase­ol­o­gy and le mot juste to reli­ably cap­ture the essence of the Prous­t­ian text in Eng­lish. To illus­trate how this may dif­fer, con­sid­er his orig­i­nal title Remem­brance of Things Past, com­pared with what pub­lish­ers lat­ter­ly decid­ed upon, the more lit­er­al In Search of Lost Time.

The theme of the book is sig­nalled by this title: the nature of mem­o­ry. Despite the book being fic­tion­al, Proust’s child­hood and ear­ly adult­hood in late 19th cen­tu­ry and ear­ly 20th cen­tu­ry high soci­ety France must have been plun­dered prodi­gious­ly: the detail is extra­or­di­nary and you could be for­giv­en for believ­ing you are read­ing a true auto­bi­og­ra­phy, and that the fic­tion­al town of Com­bray, in which most of the events take place, was a real French town. Through­out the book are instances of “invol­un­tary mem­o­ry”, that is, vivid mem­o­ries con­jured up for the nar­ra­tor by sen­so­ry expe­ri­ences such as sights, sounds and smells. Per­haps the most famous of these occurs ear­ly in Swann’s Way, name­ly the “episode of the madeleine”, which I repro­duce here:

No soon­er had the warm liq­uid mixed with the crumbs touched my palate than a shud­der ran through me and I stopped, intent upon the extra­or­di­nary thing that was hap­pen­ing to me. An exquis­ite plea­sure had invad­ed my sens­es, some­thing iso­lat­ed, detached, with no sug­ges­tion of its ori­gin. And at once the vicis­si­tudes of life had become indif­fer­ent to me, its dis­as­ters innocu­ous, its brevi­ty illusory—this new sen­sa­tion hav­ing had on me the effect which love has of fill­ing me with a pre­cious essence; or rather this essence was not in me it was me. … Whence did it come? What did it mean? How could I seize and appre­hend it? … And sud­den­ly the mem­o­ry revealed itself. The taste was that of the lit­tle piece of madeleine which on Sun­day morn­ings at Com­bray (because on those morn­ings I did not go out before mass), when I went to say good morn­ing to her in her bed­room, my aunt Léonie used to give me, dip­ping it first in her own cup of tea or tisane. The sight of the lit­tle madeleine had recalled noth­ing to my mind before I tast­ed it. And all from my cup of tea.

Mar­cel Proust

Harper Lee’s To Kill A Mockingbird (1960)

If you’re going to write just one book, it’s a pret­ty good out­come if that nov­el — To Kill A Mock­ing­bird — goes on to win the 1961 Pulitzer Prize, become the twen­ti­eth century’s most wide­ly read Amer­i­can nov­el, and which still sells about a mil­lion copies annu­al­ly today. Harp­er Lee (1926–2016) did just that (OK quib­blers, she did pub­lish a sec­ond nov­el in 2015, Go Set A Watch­man, which was writ­ten before Mock­ing­bird and tout­ed as a pre­quel but this was essen­tial­ly a first draft of To Kill A Mock­ing­bird).

Harp­er Lee (1926–2016) grew up in Mon­roeville, Alaba­ma, and had a lawyer father who once defend­ed two black men, a father and son, who had been accused of mur­der­ing a white store­keep­er. Both men were hanged. So you see, the young Nelle (Harp­er was her mid­dle name and was only used as her pen name) had ample mate­r­i­al with which to work in her nov­el about the irra­tional­i­ty of atti­tudes towards race and class in the Deep South of the 1930s, as seen through chil­dren’s eyes.

To Kill a Mock­ing­bird takes place in the fic­tion­al town of May­comb, Alaba­ma, dur­ing the Great Depres­sion. The pro­tag­o­nist is Jean Louise (“Scout”) Finch, an intel­li­gent and coura­geous young girl who ages from six to nine years old dur­ing the course of the nov­el. She is raised with her broth­er, Jere­my (“Jem”), by their wid­owed father, Atti­cus Finch, who is a promi­nent lawyer. Atti­cus encour­ages his chil­dren to be empa­thet­ic and just, notably telling them that it is “a sin to kill a mock­ing­bird,” allud­ing to the fact that the birds are inno­cent and harm­less.

When Tom Robin­son, one of the town’s black res­i­dents, is false­ly accused of rap­ing Mayel­la Ewell, a white woman, Atti­cus agrees to defend him despite threats from the com­mu­ni­ty. At one point he faces a mob intent on lynch­ing his client but refus­es to aban­don him. Scout unwit­ting­ly dif­fus­es the sit­u­a­tion. Although Atti­cus presents a defence that gives a more plau­si­ble inter­pre­ta­tion of the evidence—that Mayel­la was attacked by her father, Bob Ewell—Tom is con­vict­ed, and he is lat­er killed while try­ing to escape cus­tody.

Here’s an extract from the scene just men­tioned, in which Scout dif­fus­es the sit­u­a­tion with the mob (led by Wal­ter Cun­ning­ham).

“Hey, Mr. Cun­ning­ham.”

The man did not hear me, it seemed.

“Hey, Mr. Cun­ning­ham. How’s your entail­ment get­tin‘ along?”

Mr. Wal­ter Cunningham’s legal affairs were well known to me; Atti­cus had once described them at length. The big man blinked and hooked his thumbs in his over­all straps. He seemed uncom­fort­able; he cleared his throat and looked away. My friend­ly over­ture had fall­en flat.

Mr. Cun­ning­ham wore no hat, and the top half of his fore­head was white in con­trast to his sun-scorched face, which led me to believe that he wore one most days. He shift­ed his feet, clad in heavy work shoes.

“Don’t you remem­ber me, Mr. Cun­ning­ham? I’m Jean Louise Finch. You brought us some hick­o­ry nuts one time, remem­ber?” I began to sense the futil­i­ty one feels when unac­knowl­edged by a chance acquain­tance.

“I go to school with Wal­ter,” I began again. “He’s your boy, ain’t he? Ain’t he, sir?”

Mr. Cun­ning­ham was moved to a faint nod. He did know me, after all.

“He’s in my grade,” I said, “and he does right well. He’s a good boy,” I added, “a real nice boy. We brought him home for din­ner one time. Maybe he told you about me, I beat him up one time but he was real nice about it. Tell him hey for me, won’t you?”

Atti­cus had said it was the polite thing to talk to peo­ple about what they were inter­est­ed in, not about what you were inter­est­ed in. Mr. Cun­ning­ham dis­played no inter­est in his son, so I tack­led his entail­ment once more in a last-ditch effort to make him feel at home.

“Entail­ments are bad,” I was advis­ing him, when I slow­ly awoke to the fact that I was address­ing the entire aggre­ga­tion. The men were all look­ing at me, some had their mouths half-open. Atti­cus had stopped pok­ing at Jem: they were stand­ing togeth­er beside Dill. Their atten­tion amount­ed to fas­ci­na­tion. Atticus’s mouth, even, was half-open, an atti­tude he had once described as uncouth. Our eyes met and he shut it.

“Well, Atti­cus, I was just sayin‘ to Mr. Cun­ning­ham that entail­ments are bad an’ all that, but you said not to wor­ry, it takes a long time some­times… that you all’d ride it out togeth­er…” I was slow­ly dry­ing up, won­der­ing what idio­cy I had com­mit­ted. Entail­ments seemed all right enough for liv­ing-room talk.

I began to feel sweat gath­er­ing at the edges of my hair; I could stand any­thing but a bunch of peo­ple look­ing at me. They were quite still.

“What’s the mat­ter?” I asked.

Atti­cus said noth­ing. I looked around and up at Mr. Cun­ning­ham, whose face was equal­ly impas­sive. Then he did a pecu­liar thing. He squat­ted down and took me by both shoul­ders.

“I’ll tell him you said hey, lit­tle lady,” he said.

Then he straight­ened up and waved a big paw. “Let’s clear out,” he called. “Let’s get going, boys.”

Harp­er Lee