Says
Arnold Bennett of Mrs. Arb in Riceyman
Steps (1923):
“To
her, reading was a refuge from either idleness or life. She was never idle, and
she loved life. Thus she condescended toward books.”
How
positively twenty-first-century of Violet Arb, whose husband-to-be, Henry
Earlforward, is the penny-pinching owner of a second-hand bookshop in Clerkenwell.
With a single entrance, the shop is more cave or dungeon than retail outlet. A
visitor who peers into its “gloomy backward” reports: “The effect was of
mysterious and vast populations of books imprisoned forever in everlasting
shade, chained, deprived of air and sun and movement, hopeless, resigned,
martyrized.” Earlforward, a miser whose passion is money and gold not books (or
his wife), is ideally unsuited for Mrs. Arb, for whom books, like drowsy flies
on a summer afternoon, are but a middling nuisance. Earlforward possesses a
modest quotient of animal cunning. A customer seeks “a Shakspere” (“I’ve been
thinking for a long time I ought to have a Shakspere”), and the shop owner asks:
“`Illustrated?’ asked the bookseller, who had now accurately summed up his
client as one who might know something of the world, but who was a simpleton in
regard to books.”
Bennett’s
satire is gentle and more amusing than scarifying. We sympathize more with Violet
than Henry, despite her condescension to the thousands of dusty volumes in her
husband’s shop, none of which she has read. After all, “she loved life.” Here,
the bookman is the true philistine, not the bustling, life-loving wife. The
late Simon Leys borrows the title of “I Prefer Reading” (The Hall of Uselessness: Collected Essays, 2013) from an aphorism
by Logan Pearsall Smith collected in Afterthoughts
(1931): “People say that life is the thing, but I prefer reading.” Leys doesn’t
comment directly on Smith’s bon mot
but clearly finds it amusing. He quotes the line again in “Reading,” the second
of his ABC Boyer Lectures. In the same lecture he also cites an observation made
by Borges in an interview that serves as the epigraph to the essay in The Hall of Uselessness, “A Way of Life”:
“Jorge
Luis Borges (whose real importance as a writer is perhaps still debatable,
whereas his supreme excellence as a reader is definitively established) was
once asked by an interviewer if he did not regret having spent more time
reading than actually living. He replied: `There are many ways of living, and
reading is one of them . . . When you are reading, you are living, and when you
are dreaming, you are living also.’”
Borges
refutes the notion that books represent an escape from the more important
business of getting on with life, anti-matter to life’s matter. We might call
this the Mrs. Arb Fallacy. In another essay, “The Imitation of Our Lord Don Quixote,” Leys offers an even more forceful
refutation: “. . . especially among educated people, one often encounters a
strange misconception that there are a certain number of books one should have
read, and it would be shameful to acknowledge that one has failed in this sort
of cultural obligation. Personally, I disagree with such an attitude; I confess
I read only for pleasure.” As though to illustrate his point, when asked during
a 2011 interview what he is reading, Leys replies:
“Leszek
Kolekowski, My Correct Views of
Everything; F.W. Mote, China and the
Vocation of History in the Twentieth Century—A Personal Memoir; and for
bedside reading, I keep constantly dipping into two huge collections of
sardonic aphorisms (gloriously incorrect!) by two eccentric and lonely
geniuses: Cioran’s posthumous notebooks (Cahiers)
and Nicolás Gómez Dávila's Escolios a un
texto implícito.”
To
love books may even be to love life, or at least not to run away from it.
No comments:
Post a Comment