Again, the first sentence of A Buyer’s Market is: ‘The last time I saw any examples of Mr Deacon’s work was at a sale, held obscurely in the neighbourhood of Euston Road, many years after his death.’ Well, that novel was first published in 1952. Twenty years later when Hearing Secret Harmonies, the final book in the sequence, appeared, we learn that this isn’t true. Deacon has been rediscovered as E. Bosworth Deacon and Barnaby Henderson stages a retrospective exhibition of his work at his new gallery.
How to account for this discrepancy, not admittedly of any great importance? Had Powell forgotten the opening of A Buyer’s Marke , or did he not care that he seemed to be allowing Jenkins to contradict himself?
The answer to the question may depend on just when we think Jenkins is telling — or writing? — the story. Is he indeed writing it at all? Powell himself was vague when I asked him about this on a visit to The Chantry some 20 years ago. As far as I remember he said that he rather supposed Jenkins was sitting by his fireside reminiscing. I didn’t find this satisfying, if only because Jenkins’s manner and elaborate style are scarcely conversational; indeed they are highly, and enjoyably, literary. But I didn’t pursue the matter, partly because I felt it would be bad manners to do so, since it seemed to me that Powell hadn’t thought about this question at all. No good reason, you may say, why he should have done so.
Yet he had thought deeply about the structure of the long novel. Hence, his remark on the importance of putting down what he called ‘markers’, characters or incidents lightly touched on when they first appear, to be picked up and developed at a later stage in the narrative, one example being the shy undergraduate, Paul, briefly met in Sillery’s rooms in A Question of Upbringing, not encountered again until the last volume when he reappears as Canon Fenneau at the Royal Academy dinner. Nevertheless one wonders how much was planning, how much happy chance. When at Stringham’s wedding in A Buyer’s Market we are told that ‘Little Pamela Flitton, who was holding the bride’s train, felt sick at this same moment, and rejoined her nurse at the back of the church’, did Powell already envisage her appearance as a femme fatale in The Military Philosophers and later volumes? Did he already know that she would vomit into that large pot, so difficult to clean, after Erridge’s funeral in Books Do Furnish a Room? I wish I knew.





Comments
ritalove
April 10th, 2009 11:32amMy new friend ,
i am well pleased to contact you after going through your
profile on my search for genuine relationship at(www.spectator.co.uk) i will
like to be your good friend, please contact me with this
idd (ritakhal54@yahoo.co.uk) i am waiting for your reply soon,
rita
Report this comment
Richard Newby
January 9th, 2009 4:06pmAllan Massie's notation that "novelists aim at accuracy of representation" reminds one of Felix Frankfurtur's claim that his book on the Sacco and Vanzetti case will be "a disinterested summary of the record of a protracted trial." Frankfurter's 1927 book has misled three generations; and editors of responsible publications in the UK (and in the US) have made no effort to keep readers up to date on the Sacco and Vanzetti topic. The TLS and THE SPECTATOR must be cited for neglect. THE SPECTATOR should take a look at the 2008 book on Sacco and Vanzetti published by AUTHOR HOUSE, which cites a new primary document on Vanzetti's revolver. This is a self-published book that has earned respect from professional historians.)
Frankfurter, a law professor at Harvard and later an associate justice of the United States Supreme Court,did not mention Dexter, Maine, the hometown of two defense witnesses on Vanzetti's revolver. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes chided Frankfurter two times (letters of March 18, 1927 and Sept.7, 1927)for his failure to exonerate the convicted defendants. Good effort, says Holmes, but your book did not persuade me Sacco and Vanzetti were innocent. Holmes told Frankfurter he did not "quite see the need of making heroes of them."
Report this comment
Martel Tamerlane
January 9th, 2009 12:25amDeacon, as Jenkins clearly states, was a friend of Jenkins's father. Jenkins knew Deacon from a young age. When they encounter one another at the coffee stall they are already known to each other.
Report this comment
Bill Corr
January 8th, 2009 12:11pmIs Allan Massie inviting us to submit lists of howlers in fiction?
You know: the London Season set at the wrong time of year and so on? Anthony Burgess' work has quite a few, but so do many other very fine works of fiction.
How much realism do we demand? It perplexed me that the Famous Five and the Secret Seven and Rupert Bear never needed to, er, 'use the bathroom' but do we draw the line at wanting to know about Jane Eyre's menstrual periods?
And who can confidently identify the settings of 'My Secret Life?'
Report this comment