
It's not in the top two or three Spark novels - or maybe even top ten - but it's still brilliant, with lots of recognisably Sparkian elements. Head on over to my Shiny New Books review to find out more...
"This is rape!" His voice was reaching a pitch it had never reached before and went higher still as he surveyed the wreckage. "This is violation!"It was not rape, it was a robbery.This is one of the pivotal moments of the narrative, despite appearing on the first page - the narrative weaves back and forth, with Spark's usual disregard for linear structure, with this burglary appearing repeatedly in the timelines of the various characters. It is Lord and Lady Suzy who have been robbed, but this is not the only robbery which takes place; while the guests assemble at Hurley Reed and Chris Donovan's dinner party, another burglary is taking place...
"I don't give it a year," said Hurley Reed. He was referring to William Damien's marriage."You might be able to tell that many of the specifics have now gone from my mind, as I read Symposium months ago, but quotations like the one above reveal why I love Spark so much. That quirky way of expressing herself, so the reader is constantly being jolted in their expectations, and conventions of narrative being consistently disturbed. And of all the Spark novels I've read (which is about a dozen, I think) this is probably my second favourite after Loitering With Intent.
She poured out some milky tea. He opened his eyes. The tray had disappeared.And then the complicated family arrive. His wife Claire is patient and unshockable - and has affairs as often as he does, quite casually. There is his angelically beautiful, but unvivid, daughter from his first marriage (Cora), and stolid, moaning, unattractive daughter from his current marriage (Marigold). And there is the squabbling, self-absorbed cast of his film, originally called The Hamburger Girl - inspired by a brief sighting of a young woman at a campsite, who captivated Tom.
that world of dreams and reality which he was at home in, the world of filming scenes, casting people in parts, piecing together types and shadows, facts and illusionsApart from the mental disorientation at the beginning of the novel, there is never any wider suggestion that reality and dream might have been exchanged - but there is the possibility that fictitious events are starting, in a distorted way, to become true. It's never overdone, but is a clever thread through a clever novel. It's all quintessential Spark, and a perfect reminder of why she's one of my favourite authors.
"I don't deny," says the Abbess, "that by some chance your idea has been successful. The throw of the dice is bound to turn sometimes in your favour. But you are wrong to imagine that any idea of yours is good in itself."Alexandra is not only determined to become Abbess, she is certain that it will happen. Of course, the reader knows that it will - but it is curious that Alexandra is herself unswerving in this knowledge. This sort of prelepsis is common in Spark, and always unsettling. Another unsettling aspect is - and I can't think of other Muriel Spark novels where she does this - that The Abbess of Crewe is all in the present tense. Usually that's a big no-no for me, but it works quite well here - because it gives the sense of constant surveillance. And that's what's going on in the abbey: everyone's movements are recorded and observed, in the buildings and grounds. And then there is the scandal caused by Felicity, and started by the theft of a thimble, alluded to in the first chapter, but rather a mystery to the reader...
Again, standing one winter day alone among the bare soughing branches of those thick woodlands, looking down at the furrowed rectangle where the goddess was worshipped long ago, he shouted aloud with great enthusiasm, "It's mine! I am the King of Nemi! It is my divine right! I am Hubert Mallindaine the descendant of the Emperor of Rome and the Benevolent-Malign Diana of the Woods..." And whether he was sincere or not; or whether, indeed, he was or was not connected so far back as the divinity-crazed Caligula - and if he was descended from any gods of mythology, purely on statistical grounds who is not? - at any rate, these words were what Hubert cried.That's a great example of how Spark writes her narratives: she does not interpret or judge, she simply presents the characters, their words and actions, and sits back to watch them. In The Takeover, though, the stuff about Diana doesn't really seem too important until the final section. Before that, it's all about money and lies.
I was fascinated from the earliest age I can remember by how people arranged themselves. I can't remember a time when I was not a people-watcher, a behaviourist.A while later, whilst completing her education at Heriot Watt College, she notes:
I was particularly interested in precis-writing, and took a course in that. I loved economical prose, and would always try to find the briefest way to express a meaning.There, I think, you have the two keystones of Spark's novelistic power. She is endlessly perceptive, and always concise.
Just round the corner in Viewforth lived Nita McEwen, who resembled me very much. She was already in her first year at James Gillespie's School when I saw her with her parents, walking between them, holding their hands. I was doing the same thing. I was not yet at school. It must have been a Saturday or Sunday, when children used to walk with their parents. My mother remarked how like me the little girl was; one of her parents must have said the same to her. I looked round at the child and saw she was looking round at me. Either her likeness to me or something else made me feel strange. I didn't yet know she was called Nita. Later, at school, although Nita was in a higher class and we never played together, our physical resemblance was often remarked upon. Her hair was slightly redder than mine. Years later, when I was twenty-one, I was to meet Nita McEwen in a boarding house in the then Southern Rhodesia, now Zimbabwe. There, our likeness to each other was greatly remarked on. One night, Nita was shot dead by her husband, who then shot himself. I heard two girl's screams followed by a shot, then another shot. That was the factual origin of my short story 'Bang-Bang You're Dead'.Perhaps I should elaborate on the self-confessed disastrous marriage which led to her life in (then) Rhodesia; her cunning escape back to Britain during World War Two; her hilarious account of working for the Poetry Society (which helped inspire Loitering With Intent); the various dramatic and often calamitous personal and professional relationships Spark had... but I want you to read Curriculum Vitae yourself, so I shan't.
But, in any case, within a few weeks, everyone forgot the details. The affair is a legend referred to from time to time in the pubs when conversation takes a matrimonial turn. Some say the bridegroom came back repentant and married the girl in the end. Some say, no, he married another girl, while the bride married the best man. It is wondered if the bride had been carrying on with the best man for some time past. It is sometimes told that the bride died of grief and the groom shot himself on the Rye. It is generally agreed that he answered 'No' at his wedding, that he went away alone on his wedding day and turned up again later.This is a great example of how Spark plays irreverently with the normalities of narrative. And if the reader expects everything to be neatly unfolded by the end of the novel, then he/she clearly hasn't read much Spark before. She obeys few authorial 'rules', and weaves her narratives with little concern for the reader's expectation. If she were writing a play (and she has; I should read them) she would unveil Chekhov's gun in the first act, and nobody would ever lay a finger on it again.
This research, it appears, chiefly constitutes attracting the workforce from their duties, calmly meddling in their lives, and undermining their confidences. Dougal is all things to all people, and yet (although it is never asserted directly) it appears he might be an incarnation of the Devil. He certainly has growths in his temple which rather resemble sawn-off horns - and the events which ensue from his presence have rather the hallmark of evil."I shall have to do research," Dougal mused, "into their inner lives. Research into the real Peckham. It will be necessary to discover the spiritual well-spring, the glorious history of the place, before I am able to offer some impetus."
That is a very Sparkian relationship. I can't think of any uncomplicated friendships in the eight Spark novels I've read - there is always some element of uneasiness or sharpness, or simply the failure to communicate naturally which characterises so many exchanges throughout her work. I love conversations and plot expositions which subvert the normal rules in some way, or ignore the anticipated responses - it's on the reasons I love Ivy Compton-Burnett - and here is an example from The Only Problem. There are some spoilers in it, so skim past if you want to avoid them:Edward used to confide in Harvey, and he in Edward, during their student life together. Harvey had never, to Edward's knowledge, broken any of these confidences in the sense of revealing them to other people; but he had a way of playing them back to Edward at inopportune moments; it was disconcerting, it made Edward uncomfortable, especially as Harvey chose to remind him of things he had said which he would rather have forgotten.
We aren't long in the cerebal world of theological exegesis. Effie - it is claimed - has become involved in a terrorist organisation, and the police think that Harvey is also somehow implicated. In vain does he protest (although never especially animatedly - Spark's characters tend towards the calm and detached) that he hasn't spoken to Effie for years. The rest of The Only Problem follows this mad chain of events - Harvey calmly continuing to offer his readings of Job, while the police interrogate him and his wife's motives and actions remain mysterious.Anne-Marie had put some soup on the table. Harvey and Ruth were silent before her, now that she wasn't a maid but a police auxiliary. When she had left, Ruth said, "I don't know if I'll be able to keep this down. I'm pregnant.""How did that happen?" Harvey said."The same as it always happens.""How long have you known?""Three weeks.""Nobody tells me anything," Harvey said."You don't want to know anything."
"Did you have a nice evening at the pictures, Taylor?" said Charmian.
"I am not Taylor," said Dame Lettie, "and in any case, you always called Taylor Jean during her last twenty or so years in your service."
Mrs. Anthony, their daily housekeeper, brought in the milky coffee and placed it on the breakfast table.
"Did you have a nice evening at the pictures, Taylor?" Charmian asked her.
"Yes, thanks, Mrs. Colston," said the housekeeper.
"Mrs. Anthony is not Taylor," said Lettie. "There is no one by the name of Taylor here. And anyway you used to call her Jean latterly. It was only when you were a girl that you called Taylor Taylor. And, in any event, Mrs. Anthony is not Taylor."
Godfrey came in. He kissed Charmian. She said, "Good morning, Eric."
"He is not Eric," said Dame Lettie.
But since then I've come to learn for myself how little one needs, in the art of writing, to convey the lot, and how a lot of words, on the other hand, can convey so little.
** (I changed "beautifully" to "very well" before sending the book to the publisher. I had probably been reading too much Henry James at that time, and "beautifully" was much too much.)
**
I knew I wasn't helping the readers to know whose side they were supposed to be on. I simply felt compelled to go on with my story without indicating what the reader should think.
The main character was Nanny. I had livened it up by putting Nanny and the butler on the nursery rocking-horse together during the parents' absence, while little Eric was locked in the pantry to clean the silver.As a hint of what is to come, it turns out that Fleur's flight of fancy does, in part, turn out to be truth. Which Stuck-in-a-Book reader could fail to notice similarities to Miss Hargreaves?
Eventually Lise takes a ball-point pen from her bag and marks a spot in a large patch of green, the main parkland of the city. She puts a little cross beside one of the small pictures which is described on the map as 'The Pavilion'. She then folds up the map and replaces it in the pamphlet which she then edges in her hand-bag. The pen lies, apparently forgotten, on the bed. She looks at herself in the glass, touches her hair, then locks her suitcase. She finds the car-keys that she had failed to leave behind this morning and attaches them once more to her key-ring. She puts the bunch of keys in her hand-bag, picks up her paperback book and goes out, locking the door behind her. Who knows her thoughts? Who can tell?The ending didn't come as a huge surprise to me - Spark leaves an enormous clue - but, as with Lise's travel throughout the mysterious city, the journey is easily as important as the destination. I finally see what is so special about Muriel Spark, and will definitely be on the hunt for more of her work now. Suggestions welcome...