Вход не произведенThe Russian Wodehouse Society
Форумы Главная Помощь Поиск Вход
Начало Тема Форум Российского общества Вудхауза / О П.Г.Вудхаузе / Exclusive Extracts from McCrum Biog
- - Автор gmk (Учредитель) Время 2004-08-24 22:52
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/printFriendly/0,,1-7-1225510,00.html

WODEHOUSE, THE REVILED ‘TRAITOR'

AFTER P. G. WODEHOUSE'S INFAMOUS WARTIME BROADCASTS FROM BERLIN, THE
BRITISH GOVERNMENT ENGINEERED A MEDIA CHMPAIGN AGAINST THE WRITER,
SAYS ROBERT McCRUM IN AN EXTRACT FROM HIS NEW BIOGRAPHY

The Times (London)
August 23, 2004, Monday

In the highly charged atmosphere of wartime Britain, the idea that
such a popular and famous Englishman as P. G. Wodehouse should be
broadcasting on Nazi radio caused an immediate outcry. The press
assumption that Wodehouse had bought his freedom was first expressed
in the Daily Mirror headline, "The price is?". In the same edition,
William Connor devoted his Cassandra column to accusing Wodehouse of
"browsing and sluicing" with the Nazis in Berlin's biggest and best
hotel. Connor went on to contrast this with the "great acres of
London, Coventry, Liverpool and other cities flattened by his Hunnish
hosts".

As the press campaign gathered momentum, official Britain began to
react to the news from Berlin. Anthony Eden accused Wodehouse of
having "lent his services to the Nazi war propaganda machine" and
Quintin Hogg (Lord Hailsham) compared Wodehouse to the infamous Nazi
propagandist Lord Haw-Haw. A Government-led campaign against Wodehouse
was about to become exceedingly ugly.

On July 4, Duff Cooper, in his role as Minister of Information,
entertained a number of well-known journalists to a lunch at the
Savoy. Among them was William Connor. The upshot was that Duff Cooper
asked Connor to write a "postscript" to a BBC evening news bulletin.
He undertook to hand the script, uncensored, to the BBC. When the
Director of Talks, appalled by what he had read, argued strongly
against broadcasting it, the minister simply ordered him to do as he
was told. And so, at nine o'clock on the evening of July 15, after a
regular news bulletin, Cassandra made the broadcast that launched the
penultimate phase of the Wodehouse affair.

"I have come to tell you tonight," Connor began, "of the story of a
rich man trying to make his last and greatest sale -that of his own
country." Warming to his theme, Connor cast Wodehouse as the craven
pawn of the devilish cripple, Josef Goebbels. He concluded with a
rhetorical flourish: "Fifty thousand of our countrymen are enslaved in
Germany. How many of them are in the Adlon Hotel tonight? Barbed wire
is their pillow. They endure -but they do not give in. They suffer
-but they do not sell out. Thejails of Germany are crammed with men
who have chosen without demur. But they have something that Wodehouse
can never regain. Something that 30 pieces of silver could never buy."

As the BBC had feared, the public reaction was swift and vehement.
Protests came in from all over the country.

Emboldened by the public reaction, the Chairman of the BBC Governors
threatened to write a letter to The Times setting out the governors'
position. In response, Duff Cooper drafted his own letter to The Times
in which he made it plain that his "was the sole responsibility for
the broadcast" but that "occasions may arise in time of war when plain
speaking is more desirable than good taste".

Wodehouse made only one attempt to set the record straight. In a
retrospective preamble to the script of his fourth broadcast, he said:
"The press and public of England seem to have jumped to the conclusion
that I have been in some way bribed or intimidated into making these
broadcasts. This is not the case." This belated and ineffectual
self-justification was as ill-conceived as every other aspect of his
conduct during these unhappy weeks, and completely failed to address
the substance of the case against him.

July 1941 was the worst month of Wodehouse's life, and the disgrace
would never leave him. But while he rarely betrayed his feelings about
the broadcasts, there is no doubt he was badly wounded. Wodehouse's
subsequent actions also provide a clue to his distress. Wodehouse
wanted to go home to explain himself and protest his innocence: on
three separate occasions he formally requested permission to leave.
First, he proposed travelling overland to Palestine and then back to
London, but the Ministry of Propaganda saw to it that the request was
turned down.

Next, he tried and failed to get authorisation for a return to England
via Lisbon, a neutral port. Finally, he asked to go to Sweden, where
he was always popular, but in vain. The Nazis were determined to hang
on to him. Wodehouse's response was predictable: he buried himself in
work.

Towards the end of the war, Wodehouse was in Paris, where he had to
live with the unresolved accusations of treason for which, as he knew
only too well, the sentence was the death penalty. The Nazi occupation
was disintegrating and there were often violent street battles between
warring factions, exacerbated by the settling of scores with the dying
Vichy regime. Whatever Wodehouse's sangfroid, the atmosphere in Paris
was vengeful, hysterical and frightening, exacerbated by the bitter
cold and severe food shortages.

When the Americans liberated Paris on August 25. Wodehouse knew what
he had to do.

In a mood of resigned fatalism, he asked an American colonel to inform
the British authorities of his whereabouts. On September 5, Major
Cussen of MI5 flew to Paris to question him about his wartime
behaviour.

Wodehouse managed to turn a potentially dangerous encounter into a
personal vindication. He was painfully frank and his account soon
convinced his interrogator of his fundamental innocence. But while
Cussen exonerated Wodehouse, his analysis was no whitewash. He
observed that Wodehouse was "very susceptible to any form of flattery"
and that "by lending his voice and personality to the German
broadcasting station, Wodehouse did an act which was likely to assist
the enemy".

Despite these negative comments, Cussen concluded that "a jury would
find difficulty in convicting him of an intention to assist the
enemy".

For Wodehouse the Cussen report had two important deficiencies. First,
it contained no examination of German documents (now lost) or German
witnesses (now dead). Second, although the Director of Public
Prosecutions appended a note to the file saying that "there is not
sufficient evidence to justify a prosecution of this man", its
findings were never revealed to Wodehouse and could not be made public
until 1980, five years after Wodehouse's death. The cruellest feature
of Wodehouse's long old age was that he never knew, definitively, that
his case was closed.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/printFriendly/0,,1-7-1225508,00.html

AN ACT OF REPARATION TO AN OLD FRIEND

The Times (London)
August 23, 2004, Monday

IN OLD AGE, and exile in New York, Wodehouse craved solitude as much
as redemption. In a return to childhood habits, he wanted more than
ever, he said, to be left alone with his characters. At first, his
house on Long Island was simply a summer retreat, a place of cooling
ocean breezes, but gradually Remsenburg became the home that he
preferred, ideal for afternoon walks and well suited to the Wodehouse
menagerie.

As part of his drive for re-acceptance in England, he wrote regular
pieces for Punch and published Over Seventy, subtitled An
Autobiography with Digressions, a masterpiece of contrivance,
perpetuating the myth of "Dear old Wodehouse", and advertising a mood
of contentment.

There was no thought of returning to live in Europe. America was
unequivocally his home now. Besides being the country that had given
Wodehouse refuge after the war, it was the place where he was free
from the fear of prosecution. Even after a decade of peace, he was
still tormented by such worries. "Till now," he wrote, "I have always
had the idea that there might be trouble if I went to England....but I
imagine they would hardly dare to arrest an American citizen!" So, at
his wife's urging, Wodehouse began to follow the logic of their
situation and consider taking American citizenship. Early on the
morning of December 16, 1955, after months of agonising, he was driven
to the court house in Riverhead, Long Island, and underwent the
formalities which, according to his friend, the New Yorker writer
Frank Sullivan, "makes up for our loss of T. S. Eliot and Henry James
combined". In grateful exhilaration, Wodehouse replied that, now he
could vote, he anticipated a lot of changes. "I see myself directing
the destinies of this great country and making people sit up all over
the place," he joked. "I may decide to abolish income tax."

Shortly before the final move to Remsenburg, Wodehouse accepted an
invitation from the poet Stephen Spender, then editor of Encounter, to
publish the script of his Berlin broadcasts. This was a very big deal
but the version published by Encounter differs in a number of
significant ways from the original texts. Having learnt that to make
light of his experience in Nazi Germany did not go down well with the
public, Wodehouse cut out the paragraph which had described internment
as "quite an agreeable experience" along with a number of other
troublesome sentences.

It was typical of Wodehouse that he should amend his own work without
indicating that he had done so. And of course, his ulterior motive was
to present himself in the best possible light. He still did not -and
never would -grasp the historical dimensions of his offence. It would
never have occurred to him to indicate how the version he was printing
differed from what he had actually read out from a studio in Berlin.

As he approached 80, Wodehouse's quest for rehabilitation reached its
apogee. On July 15, 1961, 20 years to the day since Cassandra had
launched his BBC assault on "Pelham Grenville Wodehouse", Evelyn Waugh
broadcast a birthday salute, also on the BBC, "an act of homage and
reparation" to his friend. "An old and lamentable quarrel must be
finally and completely made up and forgotten ..." he said.

Waugh's remarks were a rebuke to the English establishment's treatment
of Wodehouse, a rebuttal of Wodehouse's supposed treachery, followed
by a celebration of his "idyllic world". But while he easily disposed
of the charge of treason, he was unable to eradicate the accusations
of collaboration. That, as scores of Wodehouse commentators have
discovered, would prove impossible.

# These are edited extracts from P. G. Wodehouse: A Life by Robert
McCrum, published by Viking at ё20. Available for ё16 from Times Books
Direct plus ё2.25 p&p; 0870 1608080 Was it fair to describe Wodehouse
as a traitor? E-mail debate@thetimes.co.uk
Исходное - Автор gmk (Учредитель) Время 2004-08-27 18:28
http://www.spectator.co.uk/bookreview.php?table=old&section=current&issue=2004-08-28&id=2413

Not an egg, bean or crumpet
Philip Hensher
WODEHOUSE
By Robert McCrum
Penguin/Viking, £20, pp.53, ISBN:0670896926

Among the great works of art written in the prison camps of the second world war are Messiaen’s Quartet for the End of Time, Viktor Ullman’s The Emperor of Atlantis, Ezra Pound’s The Pisan Cantos and P. G. Wodehouse’s Joy in the Morning. Spot the odd one out. Robert McCrum, with some ingenuity, has managed to isolate some lines in Joy in the Morning, that incomparably sunny comedy, which may be inflected by Wodehouse’s difficult war. The Gestapo translates into a little sourness about village policemen, and that is about it.

McCrum yields to temptation, and describes Wodehouse’s war history as the defining episode of his career, but that is not right. Rather, the story of how the sunny and naпve comic novelist was sucked into the Nazi war machinery looks like a monstrous juxtaposition of things which were never meant to meet. The aging novelist left it too late to escape his home in Le Touquet and was captured by the advancing Germans. Imprisoned, he amused his fellow inmates by some jocular talks about the experience, very much in Bertie Wooster’s best style. The Germans slowly became aware of the celebrity they were holding, and in the middle of wartime persuaded Wodehouse to broadcast these and other talks from Berlin, putting him up at the Adlon Hotel.

Wodehouse can’t be accused of anything worse than extreme stupidity here. He had no idea of the outrage these broadcasts would stir up in Britain and America and, as soon as he understood, he stopped. Subsequently, and for many years, he was regarded as a traitor in many quarters. It is a bizarre episode, but it doesn’t define Wodehouse’s career, or only in the sense that it clearly defined the limits of the great comic novelist’s understanding of the world, and I think we would have been able to work that out in any circumstances.

Wodehouse was quite simply a great novelist, but his greatness doesn’t reside either in his understanding of the world or in the profundity of his themes. McCrum sums up his claims at the end of his biography: ‘In the lives of most great writers, there are usually two lasting themes, love and work. With Wodehouse these are indistinguishable, and both prevail.’ The trouble with this claim is that, on its own, it would not explain why Wodehouse is better than, say, his friend Denis Mackail’s Greenery Street, or indeed any number of books with no merit at all. Many of Wodehouse’s novels, really, are about nothing at all; many of the best, indeed. Their merits lie not in their themes, but in the intricate patterning of their brilliant plotting, and, above all, in their linguistic inventiveness.

The genius of the plotting came, mostly, through practice. The early novels don’t have the elegant unity of the high period. A novel like Psmith in the City of 1910 — already his 14th book — is highly inventive in individual episodes, but remains a comic sequence of situations of the sort Wodehouse would grow out of; the deus ex machina device at the end, too, is an indulgence he would not permit himself later. These early books are instantly enchanting, but lack the economy and purposefulness of the vintage period. In Love Among the Chickens, the first of the Ukridge stories, it is impossible not to wonder how much more comic mileage the mature Wodehouse would have got out of Ukridge’s chickens themselves.

The characteristic feature of the high-period novels of the 1920s and 1930s is an incredible economy with material — nothing goes to waste, whether it is a silver cow-creamer, the theft of a policeman’s helmet or Gussy Fink-Nottle’s sobriety. Everything is introduced purposely, and we enter into plots of unbelievable complexity (one could win a bet by challenging anyone to recount the narrative of the mad day and night which forms The Code of the Woosters). The great hilarious scenes, like Gussie’s drunken speech to the boys of Market Snodsbury Grammar School in Right Ho, Jeeves are not just set pieces: they are prepared for with fine scrupulousness, and make their mark because of the perfect, classical control of the plot. The immortal Madeline Bassett, in book after book, is a ticking bomb: as soon as she is released, by whatever means, from her current attachment, she may be relied upon to set the plot going in a delirious direction by resnaring Bertie. Of course, like Gussie at Market Snodsbury, she is a marvellous piece of comic invention: from another point of view, she forms so perfect a plot function that a narratologist could reduce her to a Greek letter.

That came through practice, but Wodehouse’s real virtuosity was there from the start. The linguistic inventiveness is almost unmatched in the comic novel; the marvellous metaphors — ‘Ice formed on the butler’s upper slopes’ — or the metaphysical flights of fancy, like the one about the Egg who, had his brain been made of silk, could hardly have supplied enough to make a canary a pair of cami-knickers. The splendid, hilarious play of register, the endlessly comic allusions, the violent freedom with parts of speech; as Bertie might have said, others abide our question, but Wodehouse is free. The idiomatic style of many of his best books, a sort of idiolect one-tenth observed, nine-tenths invented, has a powerful charm, but beneath the period flavour a true linguistic fantasist may be observed to be at work. Wodehouse’s claim to greatness is not in the fact that he writes about love, but that he once described ‘aunt calling to aunt like mastodons bellowing across the primeval swamp’.

The world is idyllic, and virtually unchanging from its Edwardian perfection; it is true that Mosley’s Blackshirts produce an unforgettable twist at the end of The Code of the Woosters — and Wodehouse’s savage mockery of Spode’s Black Shorts is, on its own, enough to show that he held no brief for Nazism. Only once or twice subsequently does the modern world intrude. In Aunts Aren’t Gentlemen a rather unconvincing anti-war demonstration brings us into the 1970s; in Ring for Jeeves, a somewhat peculiar book, Bertie is entirely absent at a technical college, learning to fend for himself without servants in the post-war socialist paradise. But apart from that, the world never really changes: young men are still wearing spats in the late 1930s, ‘Catsmeat’ Potter Pirbright is still making his first-act entrances with a tennis racket calling ‘Hello, girls’ in the early 1950s. And within this static world we delight in an unbridled linguistic fantasy and rhetoric, which is the opposite of predictable or unchanging.

This is a very good biography, although deliberately sober in tone. Considering that very little happened to Wodehouse, it manages to sustain interest to the end. The large events in his life were the Nazi internment, a difficult patch with the Inland Revenue and their American counterparts — it will be remembered that, in The Mating Season, not even Jeeves knows a way to do down the Revenue — and the tragic early death of his beloved step-daughter Leonora. Beyond that, we are quickly into details of collaborations, taking up golf, and the acquisition of each new Pekinese dog.

It isn’t a life rich in incident, and Wodehouse himself was not so complex or busy a character to make a biography essential. He had no interest in sex whatever — perhaps this was due to a bout of mumps, but it certainly turned him into the perfect light novelist, with no overtones to the comic entanglements in his books. Or only one, because no one could fail to be touched by the tender mutual devotion of Bertie and Jeeves which underlies the skulduggery. Moreover, Wodehouse was startlingly ungregarious, often disappointing visitors who expected a display of wit; there is not one spontaneous bon mot recorded here, and very few memorable appearances at the dinner table. He was just a supremely dedicated and professional writer.

Nevertheless, the biography does manage to sustain interest, perhaps because Wode- house never wasted a scrap of potential material. His early education produced school stories; a patch working for a bank produced Psmith in the City; a craze for golf resulted in the excellent golf stories. McCrum is able to show where Bertie’s prep school was in real life, why Lord Emsworth is so named, and a hundred other tiny details, fascinating to the real obsessive.

He turns up, too, some surprises; I had not quite realised the scale of Wodehouse’s success. By the late 1920s he was running a vast house in Mayfair with a dozen staff. Some of his books sold three million copies in his lifetime, which builds up, if you write three or four books a year — he would have been still richer if he had taken more care not to offend Hollywood with some blasй interviews about the studio’s casual way with moolah. Nor did I know that Wodehouse himself was from quite an aristocratic background — one would have guessed something a little more aspirational from the Blandings series — or that, evidently, he took no interest in insinuating himself into smart society or the country-house set. His real friends were fellow writers and Pekinese enthusiasts, like Denis Mackail, and he could never have been considered an egg, bean or crumpet.

There is, of course, the formidable Lady Wodehouse, as she became, who sounds on this telling to be from topknot to slipsole the woman that God forgot. Theirs was a companionable and sexless marriage, obviously extremely happy, but it must have been hard to deal with some of her behaviour. Taking evident pleasure, while in Berlin during the war, in being ‘surrounded by handsome young men in [Nazi] uniform’, she nevertheless welcomed every opportunity to bait her hosts. A German observer records:
One night we were on the underground, and the train stopped between stations [because of an air raid]. Mrs Wodehouse said in a loud voice, speaking in English, ‘Now what is this ridiculous nonsense? Why must we stand here? Why can’t they move on another few hundred metres and let us out?’ I thought, Oh, my God. The tube was full of exhausted German workers, but nobody stood up and said ‘Shut up, it’s because of the British planes.’
Her behaviour may have been more due to bravery than McCrum allows, but all the same a difficult woman to deal with.

What we have here is the quiet life of a man supremely dedicated to his art, who really would not have chosen anything at all to come between him and the practice of that art, and who largely succeeded in ensuring that. It isn’t a terribly interesting story, apart from the Nazi interlude, although McCrum succeeds in keeping our attention and has done a fine, scrupulous job. All it is is the story of someone who, every morning for a long lifetime, went upstairs after breakfast and somehow wrote 90 enchanting books, at least 20 of which easily qualify as masterpieces of comic literature and half a dozen as masterpieces by any standards. You notice that McCrum’s book is called Wodehouse, not P. G. Wodehouse as it would have been 20 years ago; that is evidence of a reputation which will surely continue to grow, as it deserves to.
Начало Тема Форум Российского общества Вудхауза / О П.Г.Вудхаузе / Exclusive Extracts from McCrum Biog

Powered by mwForum 2.29.6 © 1999-2015 Markus Wichitill