Monday, 4 February 2013

A Spy in the Bookshop

I've been a bit worried about what will happen when I get to my first Reading Presently book which I haven't hugely liked.  And the time has come.  Since it was given by a very dear friend (my ex-colleague Lucy) I don't want to seem unappreciative - but I also, of course, don't want to lie.  So I'm just going to give my honest review, with the caveat that I'm VERY grateful to Luce for giving it to me (and another addendum, that I've just read a really fun, great book which Lucy also gave me.)

As it happens, I didn't especially dislike A Spy in the Bookshop (letters between Heywood Hill and John Saumarez Smith 1966-74), it just disappointed me a bit.  JSS (as I shall know him for the rest of this review) had previously edited the letters of Heywood Hill and Nancy Mitford, which I very much enjoyed - and was actually the first thing I read in the Mitford canon.  Obviously buoyed by success, JSS decided to publish his own correspondence with Heywood Hill...

Hill had just retired from the bookshop at 10, Curzon Street, and running the shop was a man with the extraordinary name Handasyde Buchanan (known as 'Handy').  His wife Mollie worked there too, as well as assistant Liz.  The letters JSS sends to Hill are, basically, 165 pages of them bitching about the Buchanans.  Forgive the terminology, but nothing else will quite fit.

You know when you're on a bus, or in a shop, and overhear angry conversation between two people about an absent third - and you think "I bet it's six of one and half a dozen of the other"?  Yes?  That is to say, the absent third person would probably have equally as compelling a case against the gossiping couple present?  That's the feeling that I got from A Spy in the Bookshop (2006).  JSS writes off a letter saying "THIS is something awful Handy did today"; Hill replies "Gosh, that's awful"; JSS writes "You think THAT'S awful?  What about THIS!"

I don't blame JSS for writing these letters.  I imagine it was rather cathartic - and sometimes, as with the following example, rather amusing:
Instead, he took the chance when Mollie was away, "to smarten me up": a process that I need hardly describe, consisting as it always does of a catalogue of his own virtues.
but it does rather pall.  Which makes it particularly galling when JSS does edit out excerpts which seem rather more interesting.  This editorial comment made me gnash my teeth, and pencil two exclamation marks in the margin:
[Some details followed about Rome and some of the people, including Muriel Spark, whom I'd met through my ex-uncle Ronald Bottrall.]
Oh, John!  Tell us about that, please!

There is enough about the everyday running of a bookshop to keep me reading, and anybody who can slip in anecdotes about Nancy Mitford is onto a winning thing with me, but I would have loved more.  Heywood Hill could also be witty when he wanted to be:
P.S. One of those real hopeless customer questions from a neighbour here.  A book about a man in California who kept wolves as Alsatians.  She had it in paperback but lost it, she found it such a help with her jackal.
But here again, I'm afraid I have a problem with their outlook.  I hate the idea of books being worth a lot of money if they're first editions, and all that talk of 'unclipped', 'neat copy' etc.  The idea of books as collectible objects based on their appearance or scarcity rather sickens me, as an avid reader.  And commercial value, naturally for booksellers, is paramount in their mind.

Heywood Hill has proven to be a worthy correspondent, in the letters with Nancy Mitford, and I did get the sense that he was lowering himself rather for JSS's petty missives.  I don't doubt a genuine affection between them, but I do believe that Hill wasn't bringing out his best letters for JSS.

It's a fun enough collection, and the bookshop setting certainly helps, but it does scream afterthought, once the Nancy Mitford letters were successful.  Without either correspondent having her talent for letter-writing, and with such a repetitive, almost bitter, note sounding throughout, A Spy in the Bookshop is only fairly enjoyable - and there are certainly better places to look for this sort of collection.  But, once again, thank you to Lucy for being sweet enough to give me a copy!


14 comments:

  1. Fascinating review! I enjoyed reading your thoughts on this much more than you enjoyed the actual text.

    That spirit of bitching has becoming increasingly vexing to me over the years. The more I live in the world, the more I simply want people to be nice to one another -- even in private letters. (This isn't to say I never indulge in bitching myself, but the aspiration to rise above it is there...)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think you're right, Diana! And, while I can see how it could have been cathartic at the time, publishing it is a whole new step...

      Delete
  2. The editing sounds a bit harsh - fancy leaving chunks out but providing *tantalising* references to them! So mean... ;-)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I know! I think I audibly squawked at the book when I got to that Spark bit.

      Delete
  3. I would have to give the book extra points for a having a wonderful title, but alas, all that bitching does sound as if it would start to grate.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Weeeeelllllllll - there's bitching and bitching! Yes, it can be cathartic and I know in the office I work at we have a good moan sometimes to let off steam - but we don't do it all the time, and I would a whole book of this kind of stuff (especially if I felt it was unjustified) a bit tedious. Well done for making it to the end....!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I suppose he actually bitched about once or twice a month, but seeing them all together was rather manic...

      Delete
  5. This correspondence between the new blood and therefore the retired former owner offer additional recreation,and wisdom, regarding the astonishingly turbulent world of literary book commerce within the terribly recent past.Thanks for sharing with us such a wonderful spy book.
    The Equation

    ReplyDelete
  6. Well, in Lucy’s defense, it does seem like the sort of book you would get on with. :)

    I know what you mean about having trouble thinking of books purely for their monetary value. The idea of someone with rows and rows of signed first editions, too afraid to read them lest they become devalued makes me a little sad. There was a discussion once on goodreads about used versus new books and so many people (and I include myself) wrote in to say they love second hand books because of the connection to the books’ former readers. So who cares if it is dog eared or what edition it is; books are meant to be loved and shared, not objectified.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. True, especially since I told Lucy that I wanted a copy!

      And, oh yes, I love books with strong connections to previous owners.

      Delete
  7. That editing style is exactly what irritated me about the HH-NM collection of Saumarez Smith's. But you still managed to enjoy that book far more than I did. I think I'll avoid this one.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If you didn't like HH-NM, then you definitely won't like this!

      Delete

Thanks so much for taking the time to comment - my favourite part of blogging is reading your comments!

Annoyingly, Blogger often messes up with comments... try refreshing, or commenting Anonymously (add your name in, though!) or using Firefox/Chrome instead of Internet Explorer. (Ctrl+c your comment first!)

Failing everything, email me: simondavidthomas[at]yahoo.co.uk - or just email me anyway :)

Thanks!