Lament for CBC Radio 2

I miss my radio station! I have been a loyal CBC listener for over 30 years. Since the launch of the new CBC, I have turned on Radio 2 almost every day, out of habit and out of optimism that I’ll like what I hear. No luck so far! I know that there’s still classical music programming, from 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. I find this particularly disappointing: I don’t know about the rest of the CBC-2 audience, but I’m at work, and my kids are in school, between 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. We used to always tune in to CBC-2 on our way in to and home from school, and I can’t count the number of times we heard something we all enjoyed or learned from or took an interest in. No more. CBC-2 used to be the default setting on all of our radios. No more. The thing is, sure, there might sometimes be some good music or some interesting commentary on CBC under the new regime, but I’m not going to stay tuned in on the off-chance that something I like will come on. That seems to me the fundamental problem with this new music-mix idea: trying to offer a little something for everyone (what a Canadian idea that is!) means you don’t offer much in particular for anyone. Sadly, in Halifax we don’t have other classical music radio stations to turn to, so it will be my own playlists from now on.

Recent Reading

As the new term gets underway, I feel my opportunities for “leisure” (a.k.a. “not required”) reading slipping away–not that I’m sorry, of course, to have an excuse to read Bleak House again, or The Remains of the Day (too late now to worry that the latter is way too subtle a pleasure for my first-year students!). In the interstices of the past two hectic weeks, though, I have enjoyed reading a few things just for the sake of it.

A wise friend lent me both David Lodge’s Thinks…, which provided much amusement, and Nuala O’Faolain’s Are You Somebody?, which provoked much reflection. I’ve fallen quite behind with Lodge’s books, maybe because academic satires aren’t quite as funny when you are struggling with shaping your own academic life to your liking. Maybe now I’ll do some catching up, or at least reread Nice Work. Thinks… reminded me of another of my old favourites, Alison Lurie’s Foreign Affairs, though Lurie’s novel allows for a bit more sentimentality. I was rereading O’Faolain’s novel My Dream of You this summer and, again, enjoying especially the contemporary story (which, as in Byatt’s Possession–an inevitable comparison, I suppose–alternates with the 19thC story being investigated, or, in this case, largely imagined, by the 20thC characters), and I found O’Faolain’s memoir had very much the same wry yet elegaic tone, particularly in its descriptions of Irish landscapes, but also in its treatment of getting older. “How do people arrange to love their ageing selves?” O’Faolain asks. How indeed. I was particularly interested in her frustration with the cultural pressures towards romance–“reaching for me, trying to ruin me.” Her description of her Christmas alone moved me, with its carefully planned pleasures, its undertone of melancholy and its moments of being surprised by joy. And then it’s writing, she goes on to say, that fills “the emptiness.”

There are links between O’Faolain’s grasping after a storyline for herself that is not a romance plot and some of the main lines in Maureen Corrigan’s Leave Me Alone, I’m Reading (which, appropriately, I tried to read most of while on airplanes with two children who seemed to have an unending list of needs and wants that only I could satisfy!). I’d like to write at more length about Corrigan’s book than I have time for tonight, as it is an interesting variation on the “books about books” I’ve written up before. For now, I’m struck by Corrigan’s observations about the absence of stories about working, or “intelligent or bookish” women in the classic novels she studied. (Of course, social and historical constraints–and the literary constraint of realism–makes such plots unlikely until the 20th century, but there were certainly intelligent, bookish women throughout the centuries. As many feminist critics have pointed out, George Eliot lived a life her own fiction can seem to imply is either impossible or undesirable.) I was thinking Gaudy Night during this part of Corrigan’s discussion, and sure enough, Sayers’s novel is a key example in the next chapter. Corrigan is another critic who likes to take shots at her academic experience (“I had to pay a price for the self-knowledge I gained in graduate school: the price was being in graduate school”). There’s a lot of interesting bookish discussion in the book, though it is primarily a memoir; I found her comments on mystery and detective fiction of particular interest.

Now I’m reading Peter Robinson’s Friend of the Devil; next up is Penelope Lively’s Perfect Happines, which I “borrowed” from my mother’s wonderful book collection in Vancouver to compensate for not, after all, having been able to do any book shopping there. (Next time, it’s Duthie’s or bust!) Lively’s Moon Tiger is another of my long-time favourites.

Inger Ash Wolfe, The Calling

The Calling is a really creepy book. Although it is ostensibly a police procedural, following the efforts of D. I. Hazel Micallef’s efforts to solve a murder case that begins in her small home town of Port Dundas, Ontario, its cover identifies it as “a novel of suspense,” and that ultimately seems the more accurate category for it. Edgar Allan Poe, often considered the founder of the detective story ‘proper,’ wrote short stories in two categories: horror and ratiocination. The former (such as “The Tell-Tale Heart” and “The Black Cat”) are extensions of or variations on gothic elements and give us human nature at its most perverse, frightening, and inexplicable; the latter (such as “The Purloined Letter”) hold out the promise that reason can prevail. Though the detective work in The Calling relies to some extent on ratiocination, on evidence and deduction, by choosing as its criminal a religiously-motivated psychotic* and by the nature of its denouement, the novel overall continues that first tradition, the gothic/horror tradition. But it does so without linking its specific story in any compelling way to some underlying idea about human nature (as Poe does, with his interest in the shaky borders between sanity and insanity) or about social institutions and their impact on individual personalities (as I think Ian Rankin does in, say, Knots and Crosses). Micallef and the other ‘good guys’ are well-drawn characters and the community they work in is nicely evoked, but I would have been much more impressed by a story that arose somehow out of that community, out of its history, its landscape, or its people. Instead, what Wolfe (whichever “well-known North American writer” he or she might really be) has given us is a grim, sometimes shockingly gruesome, but cheaply sensational cop-vs-psycho story–my least favourite kind of crime fiction, as it turns us into morbid voyeurs as we hang on for the inevitable last-ditch confrontation between good and evil. I thought the cross-country crime odyssey was inadequately motivated, as well: we get some back-story, but not enough, or not deep enough, to offer insight into the factors (whether psychological or social) that might give rise to such a character. Though a brief attempt is made to connect Micallef to the killer (“it was as if they had become twins”), the comparison is totally undeserved and undeveloped, so, again, the gothic potential remains untapped. The jacket blurb (unseemly, I think, in its effusive praise, which should surely come not from the publisher but from the book’s readers) says that this “dazzling novel” is “the first in a series.” It could be a good series, if it takes what is honest and human in this book and finds the tragedy, pathos, and police work in that. But I certainly won’t assign this one in my class. For one thing, I don’t find a teachable contribution in it, either to the mystery genre or to our thinking about crime as a literary theme or a social problem. But also, I felt awful while reading it, sickened by being a witness to its events, and while of course it would be foolish, even disingenuous, to be squeamish about violence as such in crime fiction, I want the violence to be treated as more than spectacle, and here, I wasn’t convinced that it was.


*This is not a spoiler, as we follow his thoughts and actions from the first chapter.

Dear Students,

Welcome back! I’m sure we’re all looking forward to a lively and intellectually stimulating term together. Here are some tips about getting off on the right foot with me. I’m guessing that they’ll work with your other professors too.

  1. Just because you can e-mail me doesn’t mean you should. Sure, there’s only one of you in particular, but overall there are a lot of you, and I can’t realistically attend to each of you individually. If you remain determined to try the personal approach, take a look at these excellent tips on how to e-mail your professors. Are you sure that you want me to know you as ‘hotpants@mymail.com’?
  2. Still on the subject of e-mail, do your homework first. You’d be surprised how much information is online about almost everything you are planning to e-mail me about…and if you were really as dedicated to taking my particular course as you claim, you’d probably have found that out already. E-mails that begin “Dear Sir” are a dead give-away.
  3. Surprise: I know the degree requirements for our programs! I helped draft them! I voted on them! That means I also know whether my course is “absolutely necessary” for you to graduate. I appreciate your apparent interest in getting into it, but let’s not start out lying to each other.
  4. If you think I’m grouchy, try this site. Or this one. Or, worst of all, this one. When I’m not jet-lagged, I’m actually pretty cheerful and accommodating. And so far, I have answered every one of your messages, usually within 24 hours. I hope that if you do take my course, you’ll be prompt and courteous too.

See you soon!

Blogging Breather

This is just in case my regular readers (both of them…) wonder why things are quiet around here.

I’m in beautiful Vancouver for my little brother’s wedding (OK, he’s not so little anymore). Though I hope to get in some book shopping, I doubt I’ll do much steady reading, novel or otherwise, and I don’t expect to do much blogging either. Soon it will be September, however, so I should be posting again regularly. I’m thinking about doing a new season of ‘This Week in My Classes’–though I might try a slightly different approach, if I can think it through.

In the meantime, it seems as if lots of other bloggers are back from their breaks, so if you scan my blog list (on the left), I’m sure you’ll find something interesting to read.

Weekend Miscellany: P. D. James, Persephone Books, James Wood

Some articles and reviews of interest:

At The Times, there’s an interesting interview with P. D. James, who has a new Adam Dalgleish novel coming out. James has often remarked that she sees herself working in the tradition of 19th-century domestic realism as much as the detective novel; her interest in the Victorians shows up again here, as does her conviction that writing mystery fiction frees up an author to focus on character and theme:

“There’s huge fascination in examining the human personality under the trauma of a murder investigation. All of us present a carapace to the world that conceals things we wish to keep to ourselves. In a murder investigation, these defences are often torn down.” This gives a novelist “a huge opportunity”, one particularly valued by this writer, who, besides filling notebooks with “plotting and planning”, sets store by knowing her characters intimately. “I move in with them. I sympathise with the view Trollope expressed that you have to get up with your characters and live with them all day.” (read the rest here)

Also at The Times, there’s a piece on Persephone Books:

There can be little doubt that Persephone, which reprints lost or forgotten women’s classics, has filled a gap left by the bigger Virago. Quieter, more interior and less obviously feminist than the latter, it celebrates its first decade as the champion of the kind of book trendy that literati like to dismiss as dull and domestic.

Virago’s founder, Carmen Callil, when recently describing how her team chose whether or not to reissue a particular author, would dismiss rejects as “below the Whipple line”, referring to what she called, with withering dismissal, “a popular novelist of the 1930s and 1940s whose prose and content absolutely defeated us”. Persephone, as it happens, has Dorothy Whipple as one of its star authors, alongside Virginia Woolf, Mollie Panter-Downes and classic children’s authors such as Noel Streatfeild and Richmal Crompton, whose adult novels have long been out of print.

“I think Dorothy Whipple is compulsively readable and perceptive, and the 20th-century Mrs Gaskell,” Beauman says. “I’m passionate about her work.”

So, indeed are Persephone’s customers, who have fallen upon its 78 reissued novels with joy and ensure sales of between 3,000 and 10,000 a book. As the shop – which sells Persephone mugs, dressing gowns and cards behind a window dressed with a felt cloche hat and an old typewriter – suggests, being a Persephone reader is almost a lifestyle choice for intelligent women who want to settle down with what has been described as “a hot-water-bottle novel”.

Yet alongside bestselling nostalgia collections such as Kay Smallshaw’s How to Run Your Home Without Help are darker tales, such as Penelope Mortimer’s Daddy’s Gone A-Hunting, and wholly enchanting adult fairytales such as The Making of a Marchioness by Frances Hodgson Burnett.

These are the kind of tremendously English books often enjoyed (and parodied) by the heroines in Nancy Mitford and Stella Gibbons. They do, however, have a serious readership, and Persephone’s list of those who have written prefaces for the reissues include Penelope Fitzgerald, P.D. James and Valerie Grove. (read the whole story here)

I don’t remember seeing any Persephone titles in bookstores here, but now I’ll have my eyes open. And if they don’t have Canadian distribution, there’s always the excellent Book Depository (free international shipping!).

Better late than never: the New York Times weighs in on James Wood’s How Fiction Works:

The grosser elements of fiction — story, plot and setting, as well as the powerful drive of certain authors to expand or alter perception by exalting the vernacular, absorbing the anarchic and ennobling the vulgar that has impelled such messy master­works as “Huckleberry Finn,” “On the Road” and Denis Johnson’s “Jesus’ Son” — intrude not at all on Wood’s presentation, which proceeds in the steady, dark-gowned, unruffled manner of a high-court judge. Wood seems firm in his conviction that accounting for How Fiction Works needn’t involve bewildering digressions into Why Writers Write or Why Readers Read. For him, that matter seems settled. They do it to perfect the union of Wood’s vaunted “artifice and verisimilitude,” two virtues he treats as though carved on a stone tablet, and thereby to promote the cause of civilization; not, as is so frequently the case outside the leathery environs of the private library, to escape the constrictions of civilization, redraw its boundaries, decalcify its customs, or revive the writer’s or reader’s own spirits by dancing on its debris. (read the whole review here)

This review (which concludes with blog-worthy snarkiness, “there is one question this volume answers conclusively: Why Readers Nap”) is not nearly as favorable as Frank Kermode‘s in The New Republic a little while back. How Fiction Works has certainly received a great deal of attention, in print and on blogs: here are a few more links, in case you just can’t get enough criticism of criticism. You have to give the man credit for getting a lot of people talking about what makes good literary criticism.

Sue Grafton, T is for Trespass

Well, that was OK. I appreciate that Grafton is experimenting with different forms, here the alternation between Kinsey’s first-person narration and third-person narration from the perspective of the “chilling sociopath” Kinsey ends up in a sort of cat-and-mouse game with.* The effect is to switch genres, from mystery to suspense. I think the strategy would have been more interesting and exciting if there had been more ambiguity in the second narrative: knowing she’s evil, we’re just waiting for Kinsey to catch on, and knowing Kinsey is a series character, we’re pretty confident she’s not going to get taken out, so the suspense is always constrained. I did appreciate what may be our first outside look at Kinsey: before this, did we know she has green eyes? The book ends on an oddly didactic note; perhaps taking a cue from Sara Paretsky‘s fondness of taking on current social issues in her mysteries, Grafton has taken on elder-abuse here, but she has kept her series so carefully in the past that it’s not obviously appropriate or logical for Kinsey, back in 1989 or whatever, to urge us to “make a difference.” The back-dating does let Grafton have a little fun remembering a time when computers were expensive and rare. The writing is competent, but I don’t see why she gives us quite so much detail. Do we need to know what Kinsey does down to specified 15-minute intervals?

The back jacket quotes Patrick Anderson of The Washington Post Book World claiming that the “Millhone books are among the five or six best series any American has ever written.” Maybe he doesn’t read much?


*The phrase “chilling sociopath” is from the inside jacket, which has to be one of the worst-written book blurbs I’ve ever read (“The true horror of this novel builds with excruciating tension as the reader foresees the awfulness that lies ahead.”).

Ricardian Fiction: A (Reading) Trip Down Memory Lane

I’ve been reading Steve Donoghue’s series on Tudor fiction at Open Letters with pleasure and nostalgia. I haven’t read a lot of historical fiction in recent years, but there was a time when I read and reread everything by Jean Plaidy, especially the Tudor and Mary, Queen of Scots ones, as well as everything by Margaret Campbell Barnes. I purged most of these books from my collection at some point in my evolution into a professional critic–no doubt in a fit of pseudo-sophistication. I have often regretted it since, a little because I have occasionally thought of rereading them, and a lot because much of the history they represent is actually my own. Imagine my surprise and delight when I found out recently that some of their titles are back in print–in fact, my very favourite, My Lady of Cleves, is just coming out this September. I’d guess that Philippa Gregory‘s success with similar material must be part of the impetus for these reissues. If nothing else, my youthful devotion to these books made me quite an expert on the British royal succession (very useful, it turns out, when explaining the back story for a novel such as Waverley.)

Anyway, reading about all this Tudor fiction also brought to mind my collection of novels about Richard III, most of which I have kept. These too are historical not just in their subjects but as objects, relics of my personal history, which involves a stint as a member of the Richard III Society of Canada (they still exist and they have a website!). Yes, it started because I read Josephine Tey’s The Daughter of Time; I was in 6th grade. It ended up launching my career as a teacher, as my Richard III obsession got me an invitation to do a guest lecture in my older sister’s History 12 class a few years later (she must have loved that). Some years after that, I won a prize at UBC for the best first-year history essay with an analysis of Richard III’s reign from a Machiavellian perspective. Also, I still choose Richard III whenever I have an opportunity to teach a Shakespeare play. That way all the time I spent studying that genealogy (in which nearly everyone is named Edward or Henry) doesn’t go to waste. The reproduction of his portrait that my grandmother had framed for me long ago now hangs in my office. Anyone who has seen it there and thought “what on earth?” now has an explanation, if not an excuse.

Here’s the list of other Ricardian fiction I’ve got, only lightly annotated because it has been, well, decades since I read most of these.

Josephine Tey, The Daughter of Time (1951). Of course. In case anyone who is still reading at this point doesn’t know about this novel, it’s a mystery novel of sorts: Tey’s detective, hospitalized and bored, is presented with a selection of portraits of famous criminals, including Richard III. Convinced that the face does not match the story, he begins a research project that leads him to the conclusion that Richard has been misunderstood and misrepresented. Obviously, in 6th grade I found it thoroughly compelling. My judgment was not singular; right there on the cover, the New York Times is quoted calling it “one of the best mysteries of all time.”

Barbara Willard, The Sprig of Broom (1971). This is what today would be called a Young Adult book, part of Willard’s great Mantlemass series that begins with The Lark and the Laurel.

Marian Palmer, The White Boar (1968). I remember finding this novel, which focuses on two of Richard’s men, Philip and Francis Lovell, wholly engrossing and believable. I think it would bear up well in a rereading because it avoids some of the pitfalls of the genre, namely excessive sentimentality and intrusively artificial archaic language. In about 1983, during a brief fling with journalism, I was taking a night school course on interviewing and in need of a subject. Noticing that the author bio on the book jacket said that Marian Palmer lived in “Vancouver, Canada” (the phrasing proves the book was published in the U.S.), I tracked her down and interviewed her. She was extremely gracious and seemed genuinely pleased that I liked her novel so much.

Rosemary Hawley Jarman, We Speak No Treason (1971). Another great favourite during my youthful obsession. This novel would, I’m sure, have been one of my earliest experiences with multiple narrators: the maiden, the fool, the man of keen sight. Each of its parts has an epigraph from a contemporary ballad–I still like that touch. Like much historical fiction today, its closest cousin is the romance novel, not the realist novel, which differentiates it from its major 19th-century predecessors. I don’t think there’s anything in Scott like this, for instance:

Next to the Earl of Warwick he stood, but apart from him. He was solitary, young, and slender, of less than medium stature. His face had the fragile pallor of one who has fought sickness for a long time, yet in its high fine bones there was strength , and in the thin lips, resolution. His hair was dark, which made him paler still. He was alone with his thoughts. Ceaselessly he toyed with the hilt of his dagger, or twisted the ring on one finger as if he wearied of indolence and longed for action. Then he turned; I saw his eyes. Dark depths of eyes, which in one moment of changing light carried the gleam of something dangerous, and in the next, utter melancholy. And kindness too . . . compassion. They were like no other eyes in the world. Like stone I stood, and loved.

It’s interesting how Jarman, like Tey, starts with a close reading of the portrait, trying to motivate its details.
Rhoda Edwards, Fortune’s Wheel and The Broken Sword. The first one I never thought that much of, but I was very fond of The Broken Sword and excited when I found a copy at a library discard sale (obviously it wasn’t popular with many besides me). It’s another multiple narrator one, but this time it presumes to go right inside the experience of the central historical personages; much of it is from the perspective of Richard’s queen, Anne Neville.

Sharon Kay Penman, The Sunne in Splendour (1982). Penman has gone on from this blockbuster success (one of the few on my list that is still in print) to write a number of other historical novels, also apparently very popular, but I never cherished this as much as some of my others. The “Sunne” in the title is indicative of a much more laboured style that tries too hard to feel or sound like the olden days, especially in the dialogue: “‘Well, you’re bedraggled enough, in truth! But be you hurt?'” Well, even the greats falter when trying to capture the idiom of a previous time–though George Eliot’s worst moments in Romola (in many ways a marvellous novel) are also the result of trying to translate Italian idiom into English.

Juliet Dymoke, The Sun in Splendour (1980); Valerie Annand, Crown of Roses (1989). The thing about collecting things is you can’t be choosy. But neither of these seems worth special remark, at least in my recollection of them. I also used to have Cynthia Harrod-Eagles, Dynasty I: The Founding but I can’t seem to find it. And finally, I have one more mystery, Elizabeth Peters’s The Murders of Richard III (1974).

Now, that might seem like quite enough, but the fascinating thing about historical fiction is that those of us who read it apparently don’t tire of variations on a theme. (Surely this illustrates the historiographical principle that the ‘facts’ don’t really tell us anything until shaped into a narrative, and there is never just one narrative to be told. Readers of genre fiction never needed Hayden White to point this out to them.) Peering around on Amazon I see that my collection is missing at least these more recent contributions (and no doubt more that have already lapsed into oblivion): Anne Easter Smith, A Rose for the Crown (2006) and Sandra Worth, The Rose of York (2003, just one in a whole War of the Roses trilogy). Do you know of others I have missed? If I read them, I promise to write them up! All I really need is an excuse and I can reread the whole batch. Is there an article in here somewhere?

Adam Bede at The Valve: The Final Post

(cross-posted)

The final installment of our Adam Bede reading project is up at The Valve. If you’ve been reading along, do come over and leave a comment! Here’s my ‘starter’ post:

First, in case anyone is inspired to go back and read through the posts and comments in sequence, here they are:

Was Adam Bede the best choice for a project like this? I don’t know, but clearly some people enjoyed it, or at least persevered with it, and probably we all know things we didn’t know before, whether about George Eliot, Dutch painting, fanfic, or just ourselves as readers. I don’t have any sense of how many people were reading along but not commenting. If there are any of you still lurking out there, I hope you’ll take this opportunity to say a few words about you and your experience of reading Adam Bede this summer. I’m sure the people who have been commenting all along don’t need any special prompting from me to add their own last words!

A thumbnail version of my own reaction on this rereading of the novel is that it’s an extraordinary first book. (I know: Scenes of Clerical Life was her first published fiction, but it’s a different kind of thing.) My initial inability to read it without making mental connections and comparisons to her later work came to confirm for me that she learned how to do, better, many of the things she is trying to do here, novelistically and artistically as well as philosophically and dramatically. But she could already do remarkable things in all of these categories, from passages of memorable wisdom and poignancy in the intrusive narration to scenes of striking pathos and suspense, such as Hetty’s forlorn pilgrimage. If Adam is a bit of a stump (though arguably better, as a hunk, than Felix Holt a couple of novels later), he is excellent practice for Caleb Garth; Mr Irwine fumbles the ball Mr Farebrother will pick up and run with; Dorothea is a thoroughly secularized saint–but Mrs Poyser is as good as a Dickens character, and I mean that without irony, someone who livens up your imagination from having lived in it for a while. The overall structure seems beautifully balanced, better than The Mill on the Floss (heavily weighted, GE admitted, towards the childhood scenes and so rushed through to the end), and the set pieces such as the birthday feast work better for me for my having considered them (like the harvest supper at the end) in light of the painterly analogies explored in Yeazell’s book. But here my own limitations and preoccupations are showing: I’m thinking about the novel in the context of GE’s other novels, and there are lots of other ways we could go.

In closing, then, here’s my favourite passage from the last section of the novel. I think it captures something that really struck me this time about the underlying tone of the story, in which nostalgia for the past is charged with mourning (it’s the past, after all, and not to be recovered) but at the same time counteracted with energy for a new life richer with meaning and sympathy because of that history, just as Adam’s love for Dinah is stronger, not weaker, because of their shared memories of Hetty. We can’t really long for the past because we are no longer the same people:

It would be a poor result of all our anguish and our wrestling, if we won nothing but our old selves at the end of it–if we could return to the same blind loves, the same self-confident blame, the same light thoughts of human suffering the same frivolous gossip over blighted human lives, the same feeble sense of that Unknown towards which we have sent forth irrepressible cries in our loneliness. Let us rather be thankful that our sorrow lives in us as an indestructible force, only changing its form, as forces do, and passing from pain into sympathy–the one poor word which includes all our best insight and our best love.

And, a bit later on,

The growth of higher feeling within us is like the growth of faculty, bringing with it a sense of added strength: we can no more wish to return to a narrower sympathy, than a painter or musician can wish to return to his cruder manner, or a philosopher to his less complete formula.

As someone who has a few times this summer felt strongly inclined to “hide her eyes in selfish complaining” (Middlemarch Ch. 80), I can at least aspire to this condition of mental growth and “added strength.” It’s not what everyone reads for (not me either, not all the time), but it’s one good thing to take away an idea about how the bad and the good in one’s life might come together to make one a more sympathetic person.