As a follow-up to my previous post (in French — sorry, I was too tired for anything else), I just wanted to make a few more notes on Chantal Robin’s little book about the structure and themes of Time Regained.

I already wrote about the first two structuring elements she notes: initiation (a long journey through darkness culminating in a near-death experience and a rebirth/ illumination as the way to acquire intimate understanding of the world, of one’s place in it and of one’s purpose in life); and cycles, both of the natural and the human world. These account for much of the obscurity and the length of In Search of Lost Time: because Proust wanted his reader to experience the initiation (rather than the state of being initiated), he used every device he could to recreate the feelings of disorientation and duration associated with a quest. While, until the final revelation, his purpose remains hidden, he leaves “clues” in his text, many of them mythological (a way to consider In Search of… is a an apprenticeship of the signs through which the world talks to us). These clues, which one can only understand retrospectively, are the “useless”, asphyxiating details first-time readers often complain about.

The third element Chantal Robin identifies is synthesis as the intellectual mode of comprehension favored by the narrator. She shows how (to Proust’s narrator) ”good” and “evil”, “beautiful” and “ugly”, “moral” and “immoral” are facets to the same truths, and are equally indispensable to comprehension. In her view, Proust relies on an aesthetics of the link, on an encapsulation of worlds into every little detail (for instance, a book that has been associated with a family scene, bourgeois life and the countryside should evoke to the reader everything that Proust has said about any of these subjects, any time the book is mentioned).

This final third of the book did not bring much that was new to me, and I thought that some of the arguments were a little far-fetched, but overall I reiterate my recommendation. I don’t know if the booklet is translated in English, but for anyone who can read French and whose imagination is susceptible to get taken by the mythological, this is an excellent book to make you want to read Proust!

Chantal Robin doit être sorcière, c’est sans doute de rigueur pour être publiée chez Circé (Cahiers de recherche sur l’imaginaire) ; en tout cas, elle me séduit avec son petit ouvrage critique sur Le Temps retrouvé.

(yes, French.  Lazy lazy lazy)

Je l’ai commandé sur la foi d’une citation dans un de ces petits livres scolaires (d’ailleurs bien fait et plein d’humour) qui vous règle en 27 pages le sort de La Recherche, sa genèse, ses personnages, son importance, son contenu et ses thèmes… Je ne me souviens plus s’il était dans la bibliographie “officielle” du cours, mais si c’est le cas, il devait être tout en bas de la liste, dans les “si vous n’avez rien de mieux à faire”…

Et je me régale. J’en ai lu une bonne moitié à date, qui à la fois illumine l’œuvre et y rajoute une profondeur supplémentaire en y retrouvant la part d’obscurité, la part de mystère que sans doute Proust veut cacher derrière son accumulation de détails et de sensations. C’est un peu paradoxal, sans doute, ce que j’écris là ; mais ce petit ouvrage, en pointant vers les grands cycles, les modèles mythiques et la part d’avenir que contient le Temps retrouvé me permet d’y retrouver une respiration qui me faisait défaut, une part de poésie que je n’ai (enfin) pas tant à comprendre qu’à ressentir.

La structure initiatique que souligne C. Robin est évidente, mais son éclairage symbolique (rôle des éléments fondamentaux tels que la terre, le feu et l’eau, renaissance, passage par les pays des limbes et du désespoir,  parade funèbre comme prélude à la renaissance et à la révélation quasi-mystique) est d’une élégance rare. Elle montre que l’inversion folle, presque carnavalesque, des hiérarchies parisiennes à la fin de TR (“ce monde où toutes les valeurs se trouvent renversées“), relève de la dissolution générale des amarres de la réalité, qu’elle préfigure (comme les figures de la mer, de la lune et de la porte, symboles qu’elle relève tout particulièrement) l’épreuve initiatique du narrateur. J’ai pour ma part à cette lecture pensé aux Saturnales (les fêtes de fin d’années où les Romains relâchaient les tensions dans un pseudo-délire d’inversion sociale, fêtes qui seront assimilées à une naissance avec laquelle on nous enquiquine encore chaque année à la fin décembre), à la traversée de l’Achéron ou du fleuve du bout du monde de Gilgamesh ; j’ai pensé, aussi, à une autre évocation du pouvoir d’illusion et de mystère des éléments fluides, celle du critique G. Genette lorsqu’il parle (dans Figures 1) de “l’univers réversible” de l’époque baroque. Elle met ensuite en lumière le parallèle entre Charlus, le bien-né qui se comporte si mal, et Prométhée, en montrant l’association du premier au vol, au feu, à la “race maudite” (d’ailleurs la comparaison est explicitement faite par Proust lorsqu’il évoque Charlus enchainé à un lit). Charlus, nous dit-elle, “garde… le monde intérieur de l’esprit” ; c’est sans doute vrai, mais alors à la manière d’un devin fou, aveugle et délirant.

La descente dans le royaume des Enfers du narrateur est ensuite éclairée d’un relevé d’expressions morbides du “Bal de têtes” qui se produit à la matinée Guermantes, une scène où le narrateur retrouve, vieillis et décatis, la fantastique troupe au complet de La Recherche (classique), mais aussi de ce qui vient avant et qu’on doit au passage ajouté sur la guerre, passage que j’ai eu tant de mal à lire et que j’ai maintenant envie de relire. C. Robin cite à ce propos une phrase de Proust qui, en 1906, comparait ses projets de personnages à “ces ombres qui demandent dans l’Odyssée à Ulysse de leur faire boire un peu de sang pour les mener à la vie” : c’est la position-même où se trouve le narrateur à la fin de La Recherche

Cette nature cyclique de l’univers proustien fait le sujet, sous le beau terme de constellations comme “[matérialisation] du temps”, de la deuxième partie de l’analyse, qui me plaît presque autant. Elle montre comment Proust brise l’image de la ligne temporelle ( “cette convention qui prétend réduire le temps à une histoire”) non seulement par la figure du cercle, mais encore en y apportant ces notions de mouvements, de densités et de correspondances qu’évoquent la lourde et poussiéreuse structure des amas d’étoiles dérivant dans l’infini où tout peut se croiser. Une originalité par rapport à beaucoup des lectures que j’ai faites jusqu’ici, et qui se concentrent presque toutes sur les rapports entre passé et présent, est que C. Robin insiste sur l’avenir, un avenir qui (en y réfléchissant) est en effet toujours présent dans le livre, que ce soit par le biais de rêves, d’aspirations, de menaces ou bien sous la forme visible des jeunes gens, qu’ils soient de la génération du narrateur, de celles qui le précèdent — Un amour de Swann porte tant de germes de la suite du roman — ou de celles qui le suivent, petits jeunes hommes séduisant Charlus ou fille de Gilberte pour laquelle on fait des projets douteux. “Les extases de mémoires engagent ainsi l’avenir tout entier” résume bien cette liaison faite entre passé et avenir par la solidité du présent et de l’immuable. La progression est aussi mise en avant par le système des “rimes intérieures” (l”expression est de J.Y. Tadié), qui en introduisant “quelque chose qui est à la fois pareil et autre que la rime précédente” (ici, c’est Proust qui parle) montre les évolutions de perspective ; à noter que souvent pour Proust la nouvelle rime s’ajoute à l’ancienne, mais ne la remplace pas.

La troisième partie aborde les “structures synthétiques” du roman, et j’ai hâte de la lire !

En résumé… Une courte lecture critique que je recommande à tous ceux qui ont du mal à apprécier Proust non pour sa complexité, mais pour une certaine impression de minutie qui se trouve pulvérisée ici.

Will this first Midwest winter EVER end?
For the record — read Le Joueur (Dosto) this week. Liked it a lot (though slightly uncomfortable experience). Also, Robe de Marié, a thriller which left me totally uninterested in its many incoherences. And… that’s all I care to say about it.
I WILL try and write a Dosto post soon, though!

Simon, like Proust, is often seen as a difficult writer. His sentences are complex, run-on accumulations of words and tenses, modulated by numerous markers of subjectivity – like, as if, I think, I’d say, perhaps, etc. It’s a sentence that works hard to rid itself of conventional patterns of speech, or more accurately, of usual patterns of writing; things are presented in their immediacy, grammar is simplified, accumulation, association and digression abound.

This attempt at a more instinctive manner of communication is, of course, hard to read. We are used to texts being neatly put together, to rational explanation, to synthesis following analysis (or vice-versa, depending on culture). Used to, in short, a modicum of linearity. It is a well known human prejudice that we over-explain, draw conclusions where there is nothing but correlations, and guess correlations at the drop of a hat. Hence astrology, reading in entrails and people thinking they can predict the stock market based on some Fibonacci, pi or moon cycle-based formula.

But I digress.

Simon has a somewhat paradoxical project with La Route des Flandres (itself only a part of a biographical-related series of books). On the one hand, he is recreating a past experience (the trauma of World War II) in a more manageable form; on the other, he is trying to preserve the immediacy of it. To do this, he presents memories not in chronological order, but by way of associations. Here I must make a few side notes:

  1. Cheating #1: Simon mentioned around that time the idea that memories present themselves to use not chronologically, but depending on their importance. That would imply sometimes, it seems to me, that you would jump from one thing to another without so much as the tenuous help of objective association. The sheer force of the affect should be justification enough. Simon never does that, though – there’s always some element linking one memory to the next. That’s a very Proustian way to go about things – a clump of related things, a huge nodes of sensations emerging in an otherwise pretty disjointed perception. Simon does indeed admire Proust and refer to him quite a bit.
  2. Cheating #2: the book was in fact carefully reconstructed after a period of unstructured writing: Simon wrote a number of fragments which he then color-coded depending on the characters present in each. He organized the fragments to alternate colors – and that’s how the book was born.

This brings to mind the way I will write a dissertation given a limited amount of time: desperately scramble any idea that comes to mind on a piece of paper, then isolate a few themes, color code all rudimentary ideas, and shove them in each theme. Of course I’m doing the opposite of Simon (trying to bring together similar colors instead of trying to weave them through the course of the text); I’m amused to think that my draft paper might look more like his end product that my final dissertation.

Anyway – cheating or not, what Simon does is in fact remarkably successful. There’s a sort of indulgence, a sort of hypnosis that wants to lull you while you read the book, but every time you try to stop and think – the strands of meaning come undone, and you’re left feeling uncertain of where you are, what happened, and what Big Lessons you should take away. That last sentence would certainly make Simon very happy, but of course I’ll have to struggle with this in the context of academic learning. My plan of attack therefore is to start by focusing on the obsessions, the recurring motives of the book: horses, the mud, sexual desire, friends, suicide, etc. These are not really themes, more ornaments (at least at this stage, and in my mind), but we’ll see where they’ll take me.

Has it been two months? It has been. A long silence, and yet I kept thinking about this place. I have to admit that this thinking was a source of stress more than a source of pleasure: I have been reading quite a lot in the past 62 days, and I kept thinking I should come back here and report. And I kept not finding the time. And it felt like an obligation I was not fulfilling.

What was I doing instead?

Reading. A few fiction books, some literary criticism, a lot of class material. I finally gained access to the website for my distance learning class on November 27th, and I then discovered that a lot of mid-year reports were due for mid-January, so there was that to get ready for. I learned (or relearned, for I had studied it in high school… Fifteen years ago) an insane amount of Latin: only level 2 Latin was open, so I had to cram levels 1 and 2 into my head in 6 weeks (you are supposed to take one level a semester, so that was… a lot). I also started translating for kiva.org (that one is more an excuse, as I really haven’t done all that much yet) and working at my local university, which needed an adjunct to teach French 101. With all this going on, my husband and I still found a week to travel to France over Christmas, another week to get over the germs we collected there from my niece and nephews. And we bought a house for my in-laws, who need one.

It’s been busy, and not a little stressful… I love it though. I love the university environment though I haven’t had much chance to properly explore. I love my classes. I love dreaming about next year’s master’s, because I already know that I want to enroll for one (and I’m even beginning to ponder on subjects). I love struggling with Proust, and Simon, and Barthes, and Rilke, and all these crazy-difficult-twisted-unusual writers in my program. I love the moment when you finally crack the code, and even though I started the year highly disappointed that I skipped the 19th century and was sent straight into the 20th, I am finding strange rewards in it.

But I need to release some pressure, and I want to come back to writing here every now and then. It might get more bloggy, more rambling, more… I don’t know. Personal. Stilted. Notebooky. Whatever comes! Everything goes! An online journal where I sometimes play the wannabe lit major, I guess, even though I’m not sure what the point of an online journal is. Even though nobody wants to read the excruciating thoughts of a rookie student muddling through a program for which she’s wholly unprepared.

In short, I have no idea what I’ll be doing. Even this note… Stream-of-consciousness, and except for a little check-spell, I don’t think I’m going to edit it. I’m just not going to think too hard about this space for now. Just going to go on instinct for a while.

Ok, let’s try. Multiple Reading Personalities, take 2?

I’m drowning in notes like these. Half a notebook of them.

notebook_Proust
Pages upon pages, summaries, thoughts, feelings, digressions. I feel like I’m beginning to get it, to understand how it works, but I’m not sure “I’m feeling it”. The magic of Combray — the first part of the first book in the In Search of Lost Time series — is long gone.

I’ve abandoned my excruciatingly slow reading pace for the end of Les jeunes filles (Within a Budding Grove), just so I could enjoy the text more, and as the narrative itself was picking up I had a really good time with it. I feel like I intellectually understand most of what the text is telling me, be it the story or the vision of Art, the importance of writing by one’s own vision, the filtering of reality which is not the weakness but the mark of a true artist; and yet I am still ill at ease.

(My apologies for the discombobulated post; it reflects my state of mind).

La Recherche is written by a narrator (which I’ll call Marcel, though that might be up for debate) largely inspired to Proust by himself — convoluted construction intentional. Proust was however adamant that the narrator was not him, and he indeed constructed Marcel’s life with noticeable divergences from his (and attributed other aspects of him to other characters). What is more, the narrator is telling his life through the prism of memories — something one could forget in the immediacy of the narration, but which obviously (the title says it well) is at the core of the novel. Memories and imaginations are so closely related as to be indistinguishable in Proust’s world… That is yet another caveat against taking the tale at face value.

Against this foggy background, Proust and Marcel both strongly assert that their only goal is to fish for these “deep truths” which reveal reality in the light of the creator’s idiosyncratic vision (careful, I’m reaching into my 50-cent words jar today!)

My problem is, I’m not sure I trust either of them.

For an “anti-intellectual” writer, one who wants to talk from the immediacy of sensations, Proust is incredibly wordy, and so theoretical that a lot of the material for his novel originates in earlier essays (gathered for the most part in the Against Sainte-Beuve collection I read along the novel). That’s the least of my worries: Proust’s interest with homosexuality and Jewish identity, for instance, are unquestionably genuine, but the incoherent ways he talks about them make me wonder whether he is honestly reflecting his inner conflicts or more simply lacks self-awareness in these matters. Another example might be in the romantic obsessions his young hero develops for unreachable girls. Is he depicting some true aspect of his romantic self (with a substitution of a “she” for a “he”, which I would not consider deception in the world of fiction); or is he just reflecting the cover-up lie he used for many years, when he pretended to be madly in love with women he could not have, to dispel any doubts as to his real sexuality?

These are some really big examples, and once these questions breach the trust between reader and writer/ narrator, everything else follows: by the end of his vacation in a chic hotel, was the initially rude lift operator really talkative, or is Marcel rearranging facts to claim one more social victory? Did the nobleman really stare at him unprovoked, or did he do something to attract attention? Did he really miss such train accidentally, or did he never really mean to follow through with his romanesque but unrealistic move? Am I meant to wonder about all this?

I’m hoping further volumes will help, but at that stage I feel like I’m trying to find my way by the moonlight in a beautiful, “Lewis Carollien” maze. I’m still unsure whether I like the feeling or not — but these sure are interesting times.

“Je suis un optimiste aussi, répondit Igor. Le pire est devant nous. Réjouissons-nous de ce que nous avons.”
(“I’m an optimist too, replied Igor. The worst is yet to come. Let us rejoice in what we have.”)


Most of my reading these days is class-oriented, and it is an interesting experience in and of itself. There’s Proust, which represents an enormous amount of reading and demands close attention: I’ve never really read like this, taking notes, consulting commentaries, reading a novel and its author’s critical writing in parallel, and generally making myself be so deliberate (some would say mechanical!) about it. Some days it’s really hard and brings too much effort between the text and me; other days (like today), it can be really rewarding and glorious, when some deeper understanding, some new connection appears.

But that’s not what I want to talk about.

At the beginning of the week, I went through a rough reading patch. Proust tasted dry and pompous. I decided to break my “one book at a time” rule, at first with very short reads. Nice… but unsatisfying. So I went to my TBR pile intending to pick a book at random: I choose Guenassia’s novel out of pique, because with its 750 pages, it was the thickest of the pile and mocking me and my Proust block.

It was of course a little paradoxical, looking for a breather in the longest book available, but Le Club turned out to be the right choice. A simple, generous book, it leaves its reader ample space to daydream and feel without demanding too much thinking. It is unfortunately not translated in English yet, but it’s been published so recently that I hope it will be soon: I’d love to share it with my husband, as it tells a lot about Paris without ever making it its subject (which avoids all the nostalgia and cliches and generalizations that seem to go hand in hand with this city).

The book’s hero, Michel, is 12 years old when the book starts in October 1959. We follow him through the next five years, until the summer after his baccalauréat. I guess if one was looking to criticize the novel, the main issue might be that in these five crucial years, Michel doesn’t seem to change a lot. The story, or rather the stories, are not in him but around him: in the collapse of his parents’ marriage, in the experiences of the Eastern European refugees who gather at the café Michel and his friends go to, in the political and intellectual effervescence of the early 60’s, in the books Michel reads voraciously, in his first love stories, in the repercussions of the Algerian War on French society… There’s an undercurrent of bitterness in the book — as Guenassia said in an interview, there’s probably not one character in his large cast who doesn’t commit a betrayal at one point or another, Michel included.

And yet the overwhelming feeling left by the book is one of delight, of the richness of the world and of the human experience. All these betrayals, even the worst, stem from aspirations, desires, idealism; and no matter how low men (and women!) fall, there’s always a measure of redemption for them. There is something very comforting in this book, something optimistic in the ease with which Michel makes friends with everyone, in the way the book tells us we all belong, we all have have fascinating stories to tell, in its amusement with human weakness which isn’t so much oblivious to the amount of pain it might inflict as deliberately forgiving, a choice of to smile and take it lightly.

I imagine there might states of mind where this glibness is not welcome, but for cold, damp winter days when one needs to know that the world of men is alive and well, and that not every motion of the soul needs to be scrutinized, nor can be – it is perfect.

Next Page »