|
ARCHIVED ENTRIES FOR
MAY 2005 |
|
|
|
Patrick: Lagniappe
He lay back in the soiled sheets, thinking what a
slut Madame la Botte was, to let Lotte change them so seldom. Dante
should have had a region, above the gluttons, perhaps, but below the
lechers, for the physically unclean; or a worse one for the la
Bottes, who, spotless themselves, forced uncleanliness upon others.
He despised Dante, a little, for his lack of enterprise in leaving
so many of the less-advertised sins unaccounted for. He saw his
landlady in Malebolge, lying for eternity on mattresses of foul
straw, with pillows of dung, her nails too sealed with filth to pick
from the fat creases of her body the undying louse: yet, somehow,
the pictured did not give him the satisfaction he had expected . . .
.
--The Unspeakable Skipton by Pamela
Hansford Johnson
Click
Here to Comment or View Comments on This Entry |
|
|
|
Patrick: Lagniappe
Querini, still excited by the success of his
recital, got along with her splendidly. It was surprising how many
acquaintances they had in common. She marked her acceptance of him
as a person within her own social ambience by indulging in genial
abuse of people they both knew, an exercise at which he also, gentle
as he seemed, was by no means inept. Daniel repressed a hot twinge
of anger at the great truth this suggested to him: which was that
his own acceptance had not bee complete. The Mrs Joneses of this
world, he thought, were polite only to their inferiors, and impolite
about persons on their own level only to other persons on their own
level.
--The Unspeakable Skipton by Pamela
Hansford Johnson
Click
Here to Comment or View Comments on This Entry |
|
|
|
Patrick: Lagniappe
‘I am alien to you,’ said Daniel, ‘utterly so. I
do not sing in chorus. I do not rattle out, in a half-baked fashion,
the Freudian claptrap which has been so successful because any
dirty-minded dunce can understand it. Not that I am accusing you,
Miss Merlin, of being dirty-minded. Where no mind exists, it is
impossible for there to be either dirt or cleaniness.’
--The Unspeakable Skipton by Pamela
Hansford Johnson
The Frustrated Artiste
Usually, the sign of an author’s ineluctable
declension into maudlin sentimentality presaging a limitless
wandering in the barren wastes of banality without a drop of
imaginative sustenance to be had from any of the dried-up wells of
once-famed creativity (in other words, when one becomes like John
Updike) occurs when the latest novel features a frustrated writer.
Think of Chip, the frustrated ex-college professor cum screen
writer, in Jonathan Franzen’s painful tour-de-farce The
Corrections (if only his editors had taken the title literally,
not just literarily). Or course, there are exceptions that prove the
rule, the most notable appearing in Ernest Hemingway’s The Snows
of Kilimanjaro (well, perhaps that’s not a fair counter-example
since the protagonist there isn’t frustrated, just dying—close
enough for blog-work). And then we have Daniel Skipton from Pamela
Hansford Johnson’s The Unspeakable Skipton.
Skipton is a frustrated writer whose intellectual
gifts are unappreciated by the worldly philistines. This prolonged
bout of obscurity has turned Skipton into a hater. Indeed, he
lovingly crafts elaborate fantasies dwelling on the purported roots
of his anomie (if one can have rooted anomie, similar to a turnip, I
believe):
He had a tiny vision of himself, no larger
than a playing card painted on a finger nail, of himself walking
across the playing-fields of his public school (not, perhaps, a
great one, a snob one, but coming nevertheless within the
comfortable embrace of the Headmaster’s Conference), a proud,
Byronic boy labelled clever by the staff and on two occasions
defenestrated by his schoolmates. Not a popular boy, not with
oafs: but he had left his mark. The school, one day, would be
among the great schools because it had nurtured him, if one
could call it nurturing. He saw the football field curving over
on the western side towards the willows and the stream, his
breath making angels on the frosty air. He saw Puggy Boyle and
his mob approaching to remove his trousers, which was for them
an entertainment in times when nothing better offered itself:
and he ran, clumping in the mud, clutching himself in
anticipation, horribly winded with the hate that had not yet
turned to despair, he ran and he ran.
I know Ms. Johnson had not intended this
parallel, but I, at least, have the sense from reading her book that
Skipton has an ominous predecessor in the form of that most
destructive frustrated artist in history: Adolph Hitler. Skipton
illuminates the road that Hitler should have followed from the
sprawling metropolis of hate to the outer reaches of the hamlet of
despair. Hitler should have given lectures on landscape painting
similar to Skipton’s disastrous debut in Bruges:
He looked around. Such audience as there was
had huddled itself instinctively, as if against the cold, in a
little clot starting five rows from the front. There were some
under-graduates of Liège and Brussels whom he knew by sight,
earnest lads who would swallow down any intellectual pigswill in
their frenzy for marks, and one or two elderly women. Sitting
right at the back were three derelicts from the quais, who
picked up some sort of living out of begging from tourists. One
had sensibly prepared for the entertainment by falling already
into a deep sleep.
To further the analogy, at one point, that being
the penultimate act before Skipton’s wished for apotheosis is
cruelly transformed into his immolation, Skipton gives vent to
thoughts one could see eerily illuminating the fecal-splattered mind
of Herr Hitler:
It was good to be among them for the last
time, and not to need them. He was strong again, secure, pride
burning high in his head like the wick of a lamp newly filled.
The days of humiliation were over; and it sickened him to look
back upon them. There were times, disgusting times, when he had
been compelled to unleash submerged and horrible delights by
thinking of humility; to frame images of himself standing cap in
hand, trailing the mantle of his genius in the muck so that
swine might safely cross to the other side of the way without
soiling their trotters. He had seen himself lying in the gutters
of the night, being kicked in the face, the buttocks, the groin,
by those who at this moment were smiling upon him, assiduously
refilling his glass. He had seen himself upon his knees
polishing Pryar’s toe-caps with his tongue, tying Duncan’s laces
with his teeth, while they patted him, and called him Good Dog,
and put a lump of sugar on his nose. Beastly delights; and it
was not long since he had been reduced to them as the only ones
within a pauper’s reach.
But that was all over now. He was
Nebuchadnezzar, the mud washed away, his hair clean and barbered
again, the last shreds of grass scrubbed away from his teeth;
back on the golden throne among the kings of the earth.
I know Ms. Johnson intended this passage to be
slyly humorous in a bitter, Skipton-like manner. But I find it much
more than that—it is a chilling illumination into perhaps the most
twisted, frustrated artist’s mind who was ever granted this wish: to
become Nebuchadnezzar and have the Pryars and Duncans grovel at his
throne before being frog-marched off into oblivion. Yes, yes, The
Unspeakable Skipton is very, very funny. But, unintentionally, I
think it is also very, very disturbing.
Click
Here to Comment or View Comments on This Entry |
|
|
|
Patrick: Lagniappe
‘I do think people ought to be punctual,’ Dorothy
whined. ‘I do loathe bad manners, especially in people who claim to
be so grand.’ She might have picked out the word with forceps
and dropped it into a jar for sterilisation.
--The Unspeakable Skipton by Pamela
Hansford Johnson
Click
Here to Comment or View Comments on This Entry |
|
|
|
Patrick: Lagniappe
So, at these words recalled to him after so many
years, he felt a dreadful writhe of desire, destructive of his
resolve, of all the strength he had lived by. It was not the
beauté, the calme, the luxe, the volupté:
it was L’ORDRE. That was the word, terrible in its capacity
to ruin the soul with hopeless longing. To be offered the rest—that
was nothing: a man could resist them. But to be offered them plus
l’ordre: that was the thing, that was the torment, that was the
deepest point of the heart’s sick longing. For we live in a mess,
Daniel thought, in a sickening, formless mess; we have beauty in a
mess, we are luxurious in a mess, we are calm in a mess, voluptuous
in a mess. And so we are vulgar: men or beasts: never gods. But
l’ordre—that was the difference between man and God! Man is for
ever miserable because he is set in competition with God, and God
wins; God, in His order, inevitably, callously, in His cold
calculation, wins.
--The Unspeakable Skipton by Pamela
Hansford Johnson
Click
Here to Comment or View Comments on This Entry |
|
|
|
Patrick: Lagniappe
Duncan broke in, ‘Perhaps Skip would dine with us
as well. He-’
‘We have imposed on Mr. Skipton quite enough!’
Clytemnestra could not have looked more blackly upon Agamemnon than
she upon Duncan. If I were he, Daniel thought, I would ram her head
down into that disgusting cake and hold it there till she choked in
cream. ‘We are not going to take up any more of his time than is
strictly necessary,’ she added, with an assumption of gracious
firmness, as if working together with him for his own good. ‘Au
revoir, and thank you so much. So kind of you.’
--The Unspeakable Skipton by Pamela
Hansford Johnson
A Paean to Invective
I’ve had a chance recently to take another peek
into Pamela Hansford Johnson’s little guilty pleasure,
The Unspeakable Skipton. Johnson is yet another of
those highly entertaining mid-twentieth-century British writers who
are completely unknown on these benighted shores. She wrote a comic
trilogy about authors; and The Unspeakable Skipton is
probably the best of the three. It concerns the paranoia of the
modern writer who may have scribbled off some trifle of passing
interest eons ago but now must sponge off of the credulity of others
as he forges within the burnt-out smithy of his sterile soul the
Great Masterpiece (think William Gass and his gassy, The Tunnel).
Of course, in the States, such a person is a tenured English
professor (make that,
Professor Gass). So, us Yanks must forego the delicious
grottiness of Skipton’s louche life in the Belgian city of Bruges
while he enjoys the largess of the once-proud British pound.
But, nonetheless, we can revel in his poison-pen missives to his
long-suffering publisher. And here is Skipton’s (and Johnson’s) true
forté.
Skipton has been diligently polishing his Great
Masterpiece which he is loath to submit to the dingy caresses of his
publisher, Utterson:
He knew well enough that the cur Utterson
would like to get his hands on it. It was not only a great book,
it was the greatest novel in the English language, it would make
his reputation all over the world and keep him in comfort, more
than comfort, for the rest of his life. It would cause a rustle
in the dovecotes, for in it he had pilloried, as Odysseus
pilloried the wicked maid-servants on a line, like so many
strangling birds, every one who had ever insulted or injured
him. Cur Utterson was there: he wouldn’t like it much, but he
would put up with it, so long as he made enough money out of it.
He would grin and bear it, pretend he was pleased to act as a
model to so great an artist. But Utterson would have to wait. He
was not going to get this manuscript until it was perfect, until
every gem, from the greatest to the least, was gripped in every
golden claw.
So let’s move on to the burnishing, where
Utterson, in the sheer fictional negligee of Billy Butterman, is
being fleshed out—or eviscerated—by Skipton’s sharp pen:
‘Men like Billy Butterman are rarely
recognised as parasites, since parasitism is associated with the
minuscule; but if triple-visaged Dis gnawing the bloody heads in
the bottom of hell were to have a louse in his armpit, that
louse would be Butterman, sucking as much nourishment from Dis,
in proportion to his size, as Dis from the arteries of Judas,
Cassius and Brutus, for ever burrowing for ever gorged, for ever
content.’
Such invective is worthy of the mighty Rabelais!
Of course, Skipton is describing his own parasitical relationship to
the long-suffering Utterson who continues to send him checks in
spite of the lack of literary output. But such benevolent acts fail
to save Utterson, nee Butterman, from the stone-sharp pendulum pen
of Skipton:
‘It was upon the eve of the Feast of Saint
Pisca, Blessed Virgin and Martyr, that is to say, the eighteenth
day of January in the Year of our Lord Nineteen Hundred and
Fifty, that the hog Butterman, replete from pleasures of the
table that he shared with Valentina, his hippophile wife of
infinite coarseness and greed, made the acquaintance of Carolie
Sterling, woman dramatist, pretentious, pop-eyed, from the
purlieus of Purley Downs.’
Let’s leave off with one more venomous blast upon
the bulbous butt of Butterman:
‘The effrontery of Butterman was beginning to
break all bounds. Even the most patient of his friends felt a
longing to kick the great, flabby backside which he swung from
left to right as he walked as if under the impression that it
had the baroque magnificence of a peacock’s tail. It was
sickening to see him bear down with unctuous refulgence upon a
great artist, whom he was in process of sucking dry, to smear
him with the honey or patronage while picking his pocket.’
Click
Here to Comment or View Comments on This Entry |
|
|
|
Patrick: Lagniappe
He took out the green pen and looked at the tip
of it, reverencing the spring from which the words would tumble in
their joy and crystalline freedom, till they reached the discipline
of the river. For him, words were not simply sounds, single or in
combination: they had forms as visually distinctive as oriental
ideographs. Even when he was at his hungriest, as he was now, since
he had eaten only bread and butter that day, a word standing in its
heavenly shape like a girl with a jar upon her shoulder could make
him forget the cruelties of man and nature. Sometimes he would fall
in love with one word only, and scheme to use it: today he wrote
‘fritillary’, retracing his pen in delight down the wing-curve at
each end, the antennae in the middle. It filled his room with its
mothy light, it flickered the paper all over with peacock eyes of
gold.
--The Unspeakable Skipton by Pamela Hansford Johnson
Stupidest Literary Contest in the Last 25
Years
Click
here to see what it is. How stupid is it? Well, the
scribbler who came up with this one shamefacedly admits that David
Foster Wallace's Infinite Jest did not get one vote.
Click
Here to Comment or View Comments on This Entry |
|
|
|
Patrick: Lagniappe
In 1911 the Copyright Act got rewritten, and the
date of first publication became irrelevant. After 1 July 1912, the
reprinter’s magic year would be the year the author had been dead
fifty years. That meant 1930 for George Eliot, 1939 for Browning,
1942 for Tennyson. Decades away! In effect, a mere Act of Parliament
had rendered the stride of the series [Everyman] impossible
to maintain. So the Second World War was being fought by the time
Everyman’s could issue a selection from the later Browning, and by
then Browning was a period piece.
--A Sinking Island by Hugh Kenner
[N.B.: Kenner is describing the state of
copyright in Great Britain. Here in the States, the situation is
much
worse: Generally, 70 years after the author’s death, but
with the added glitch that works copyrighted in 1923 would not enter
the public domain until 2019. In other words, almost all of
modernism is off limits, not only to reproduce, but to incorporate
into later works. There are no giants for a new Milton or
Newton to stand upon because they are not dead yet. I think
this development, more than a mere dearth of talent, explains the
sorry state of American letters.]
Click
Here to Comment or View Comments on This Entry |
|
|
|
Patrick: Lagniappe
By five o’clock the sky had lost its color, not
through a gathering of could but of that leaden mist which is the
precursor of greater hear. Even by the sea it was uncomfortably warm
and sticky. The great ugly hotels and cafes jammed along the wide
promenade as far as the eye could reach were locked in the torpor of
an off-season. Nothing stirred upon the miles of sand, which unlike
the sands further south were not yellow, but the mud-grey of shores
in a dream. Far out, a Channel steamer caught upon its funnel, out
of nowhere, a tip of light.
--The Unspeakable Skipton by Pamela
Hansford Johnson
The New New Kitsch: A Sack of Phlegm
I have written before about how the relaxation of
standards with respect to poetry has opened wide the gates to a
motley crew of thieves, thugs and vagabonds. I neglected,
however, to describe one particularly seedy sort of poseur: the Man
of Letters Manque. This is the prolific—one might say,
profligate—author, who writes on anything and everything in exchange
for a bit of lucre. Of course, the monumental modern exemplar
par excellence is my favorite bête noire, John Updike. He can
write about
art. He can write about
terrorism. He can write about terrorizing art.
And now, he’s terrorizing poetry. Here’s his latest drippings
from the current issue of the New York Review of Books:
Lucian Freud
(An exhibit in Venice, September 2005)
Yes, the body is a hideous thing,
the feet and genitals especially,
the human face not far behind. Blue veins
make snakes on the backs of hands, and mar
the marbled glassy massiveness of thighs.
Such clotted weight’s worth seeing after
centuries
(Pygmalion to Canova) of the nude
as spirit’s outer form, a white flame: Psyche.
How wonderfully St. Gaudens’ slim Diana
stands balanced on one foot, in air, moon-cool,
forever! But no, flesh drags us down,
its mottled earth the painter’s avid ground,
earth innocently ugly, sound asleep,
poor nakedness, sunk angel, sack of phlegm.
First, I don’t object to this cri de coeur
for brutality, this paean to ugliness. I, too, am an ardent
admirer of Lucian Freud—I’d be willing to hear an argument that he’s
the greatest living painter. No, the subject matter I do not
object to. It’s the tin ear for rhythm or any form of
musicality. And, no, Updike can’t escape censure by arguing
that since the subject matter concerns ugliness, the form must be
ugly, too. What gives the game away? That horrid bit: "mars
the marbled glassy massiveness of thighs." One can almost see
Updikes brain, like The Little Engine That Couldn’t Quite, chugging
up this sludge—"Ah, it has alliteration, assonance, internal
rhyming, how delicious!" No, how hideous. Read the poem
aloud and try not to slit one’s tongue on the jagged splinters of
clotted consonants. But this little dilly smack in the middle
gives the lie to any argument of poetic competence. It reeks
of the new, new kitsch: An offensive excess of emotion. Updike
is a second-rate show off that doth praise ugliness too much.
Click
Here to Comment or View Comments on This Entry |
|
|
|
Patrick: Lagniappe
[H]e had assumed the blue expression peculiar to a
certain type of drunkard, tepid with two drinks grudgingly on
credit, gazing out of an empty saloon, an expression that pretends
he hopes help, any kind of help, may be on its way, friends, any
kind of friends, coming to rescue him. For him life is always just
around the corner, in the form of another drink at a new bar. Yet he
really wants none of these things. Abandoned by his friends, as they
by him, he knows that nothing but the crushing look of a creditor
lives round that corner. Neither has he fortified himself
sufficiently to borrow more money, nor obtain more credit; nor does
he like the liquor next door anyway. Why am I here, says the
silence, what have I done, echoes the emptiness, why have I ruined
myself in this wilful manner, chuckles the money in the till, why
have I been brought so low, wheedles the thoroughfare, to which the
only answer was-- The square gave no answer.
--Under the Volcano by Malcolm Lowry
Click
Here to Comment or View Comments on This Entry |
|
|
|
Patrick: Lagniappe
Cervantes handed Yvonne and Hugh each a menu but
they were sharing hers: "Dr. Moise von Schmidthaus’ special soup,"
Yvonne pronounced the words with gusto.
"I think a pepped petroot would be about my mark,"
said the Consul, "after those onans."
"Just one," the Consul went on, anxious, since Hugh
was laughing so loudly, for Cervantes’ feelings, "but please note
the German friends. They even get into the filet."
"What about the tartar?" Hugh inquired.
"Tlaxcala!" Cervantes, smiling, debated between them
with trembling pencil. "Si, I am Tlaxcaltecan . . . You like eggs,
senora. Stepped-on eggs. Muy sabrosos. Divorced eggs? For fish,
sliced of filet with peas. Vol-au-vent à la reine. Somersaults for
the queen. Or you like poxy eggs, poxy in toast. Or veal liver
tavernman? Pimesan chike chup? Or spectral chicken of the house?
Youn’ pigeon. Red snappers with a fried tartar, you like?
"Ha, the ubiquitous tartar," Hugh exclaimed.
--Under the Volcano by Malcolm Lowry
Click
Here to Comment or View Comments on This Entry |
|
|
|
Patrick: Lagniappe
What is man but a little soul holding up a
corpse?
--Under the Volcano by Malcolm Lowry
A Literary Myth
Once upon a time a little girl, Irène, lived with
her family in the capital of the Ukraine, Kiev. Here in the
prosperous state of the Ukraine, part of the vast country of Russia,
her family prospered thanks to her father, a successful banker. One
day, though, revolution swept across the Russian steppes, bringing
misery and hardship in its wake. These revolutionaries were called
"communists" who felt that the wealthy urban people—whom they called
"bourgeois capitalists"—had unfairly oppressed them. These
communists particularly sought out bankers to face their wrath. And
so, Irène’s family was forced to flee the Ukraine and all of Russia.
Eventually, her family found shelter in Paris, France where, again,
they prospered. Irène grew up and became a writer. Her books were
well received; and one of them was even made into a movie. But,
alas, France too was invaded by the "Nazis" who were even more
implacable and terrifying than the communists. Unlike the
communists, they did not care what profession you had. Rather, they
believed in a theory, or, rather, a story, called "race." This thing
called race they thought you were born with and could never get rid
of. Some races were good but other were very bad and had to be
destroyed. Why did the Nazis believe in such a vicious story?
Because they were selfish and the story made them feel good about
themselves since they were of a "race" that was, of course, the best
of all, and must be saved from all contamination from the so-called
"bad" races. Now, according to this race story, Irène was "Jewish"
and there was nothing she could do to change that even though she no
longer practiced the religion associated with being Jewish and had
converted her religion to Catholicism. These Nazis hated Jewish
people and wanted to kill them because their story told them that
Jews were of a particularly bad "race." And so, as the Nazis
descended upon Paris, Irène fled. But she could not leave France
and, a couple of years later, Irène and many others that the Nazis
labeled as "Jews" were deported to horrible death camps, Irène going
to the one that was, if possible, more horrible than the rest,
Auschwitz, where she soon died. Many years pass. Then, one day, a
relative of Irène’s brings a manuscript of hers that had been kept
hidden away from all the terrible invaders to a publisher. This
manuscript concerned the lives of ordinary people and how they were
affected by the invasion of France. It was published all over the
world; and people read it from all over the world. And it was
. . . .
Well, the proper ending for this literary fairy
tale is that: "And it was the greatest masterpiece that had ever
been written." Unfortunately, it isn’t. Not even close. But
that, at least in part, is not the fault of the heroine of our
literary fairy tale, Irène Némirovsky, who did suffer deportation
and did die in Auschwitz before she had the chance to finish her
novel, Suite Francaise. This work was to consist of
five interlocking novella-length parts. Each novella would
stand on its own, although each also shared one or two characters
from the work as a whole. Like Anthony Powell’s A Dance to the
Music of Time, or, more pertinently, Balzac’s Comedie Humaine,
each novella would focus on a few characters who would assume cameo
roles in other parts of the work. If completed, it’s possible that
Suite Francaise may have been described as a lesser, though
still outstanding work, similar in construction to the two described
above. Unfortunately, only two of the five interlocking parts were
written before Irène was killed. These two parts show much
promise—although, particularly with respect to the second part,
there exists a historical preoccupation with class which tends to
date the work. The translation from the original French has been
beautifully rendered by Sandra Smith. So, does this book deserve to
be read today? On balance, I think it is a highly entertaining
read which is quite affecting—although I’m not sure that latter
quality is due in large part to the work itself or the literary myth
I retold above. Who cares, I still recommend it. And, who
knows, the world is certainly a more interesting—and, perhaps, even
a better—place with such literary myths.
Click
Here to Comment or View Comments on This Entry |
|
|
|
Patrick: Lagniappe
The consul dropped his eyes at last. How many
bottles since then? In how many glasses, how many bottles had he
hidden himself, since then alone? Suddenly he saw them, the bottles
of aguardiente, of anís, of jerez, of Highland Queen, the glasses, a
babel of glasses—towering, like the smoke from the train that
day—built to the sky, then falling, the glasses toppling and
crashing, falling downhill from the Generalife Gardens, the bottles
breaking, bottles of Oporto, tinto, blanco, bottles of Pernod,
Oxygènée, absinthe, bottles smashing, bottles cast aside, falling
with a thud on the ground in parks, under benches, beds, cinema
seats, hidden in drawers at Consulates, bottles of Calvados dropped
and broken, or bursting into smithereens, tossed into garbage heaps,
flung into the sea, the Mediterranean, the Caspian, the Caribbean,
bottles floating in the ocean, dead Scotchmen on the Atlantic
highlands—and now he saw them, smelt them, all, from the very
beginning—bottles, bottles, bottles, and glasses, glasses, glasses,
of bitter, of Dubonnet, of Falstaff, Rye, Johnny Walker, Vieux
Whiskey blanc Canadien, the apéritifs, the digestifs, the demis, the
dobles, the noch ein Herr Obers, the et glas Araks, the tusen taks,
the bottles, the bottles, the beautiful bottles of tequila, and the
gourds, gourds, gourds, the millions of gourds of beautiful mescal .
. . The Consul sat very still. His conscience sounded muffled with
the roar of the water. It whacked and whined round the wooden frame
house with the spasmodic breeze, massed, with the thunderclouds over
the trees, seen through the windows, its factions. How indeed could
he hope to find himself, to begin again when, somewhere, perhaps, in
one of those lost or broken bottles, in one of those glasses, lay,
forever, the solitary clue to his identity? How could he go back and
look now, scrabble among the broken glass, under the eternal bars,
under the oceans?
--Under the Volcano by Malcolm Lowry
[N.B.: Lowry comes the closest to convincing one
that there is no boundary between great literature and great poetry;
instead, there is just one mighty, everlasting monument to the
all-knowing Logos. That first stupendous sentence to the
paragraph was crafty by an alcoholic angel. One could observe it,
poke it, prod it, dissect it, rearrange it, derange it, deracinate
it and still not find the spark of it. Not by faith alone but
through craft shall one enter the kingdom of immortality.
Learn from Lowry how to journey upon the rocky, straight and narrow
path to Parnassus.]
Click
Here to Comment or View Comments on This Entry |
|
|
|
Patrick: Lagniappe
And there, it had happened. The bull was
hopelessly entangled. Now one, two, three, four more lassoes, each
launched with a new marked lack of friendliness, caught him. The
spectators stamped on the wooden scaffolding, clapping rhythmically,
without enthusiasm. –Yes, it struck her now that this whole business
of the bull was like a life; the important birth, the fair chance,
the tentative, then assured, then half-despairing circulations of
the ring, an obstacle negotiated—a feat improperly recognised—boredom,
resignation, collapse: then another, more convulsive birth, a new
start; the circumspect endeavours to obtain one’s bearings in a
world now frankly hostile, the apparent but deceptive encouragement
of one’s judges, half of whom were asleep, the swervings into the
beginnings of disaster because of that same negligible obstacle one
had surely taken before at a stride, the final enmeshment in the
toils of enemies one was never quite certain weren’t friends more
clumsy than actively ill-disposed, followed by disaster,
capitulation, disintegration—
--Under the Volcano by Malcolm Lowry
Click
Here to Comment or View Comments on This Entry |
|
|
|
|