Vulpes Libris

A collective of bibliophiles talking about books. Book Fox (vulpes libris): small bibliovorous mammal of overactive imagination and uncommonly large bookshop expenses. Habitat: anywhere the rustle of pages can be heard.

FRANCE WEEK: Marguerite Duras: La pluie d’été / Summer Rain

Duras’ Le ravissement de Lol V. Stein was one of the first books I ever blogged about, and not much seems to have changed since then…

For a writer I enjoy, Duras is one I understand surprisingly little, and the things I know about her can be counted on the fingers of one hand. Firstly, I know she was a mentally unstable alcoholic. Secondly, in her late seventies she lived with a man much her junior, who later wrote a book about her. Thirdly, she liked tennis. Fourthly, she was interested in film as a medium. (La pluie d’été itself is a novelisation – or perhaps ‘literarisation’ would be a more accurate term – of the script of her 1984 novel Les Enfants, which I haven’t seen.) I know little about the chronology of her published works (except that La pluie d’été was one of the last) and about her relationship with the literary theories of her time (though the relationship is clearly there).

Now, La pluie d’été. It has been published in English translation as Summer Rain, but I read the book in French; Duras’ novels may be difficult but her writing is easy to read, and you can get by even with French as basic as mine. The story – or at least the surface story – is about a family of unemployed immigrant parents and numerous children, who live abandoned by welfare and school authorities, in an equally abandoned house. The eldest siblings Ernesto and Jeanne, in their early teens, herd the smaller children and somehow they all stumble along in a happy chaos: left to their own devices, but loved. Then one day Ernesto learns to read – without ever having been taught. He is taken to school, only to reject schooling for complicated reasons of his own; not the least of them being his (most would say unhealthy) love for Jeanne. But in a surprising – and to on-lookers, unsettling – way, the young genius continues to learn. Where does his genius come from, ask the teachers and authorities; and what does it mean? To the children, it only means that their happy-go-lucky childhood is bound to end.

Sounds simple enough… deceptively so. And that’s all I can say, because most of this short novel’s meaning seems to lie outside words. The characters have their private meanings, and words either fail, transcend meaning, or mean more than they say; all meaning in the novel is fluid, and all true knowledge keeps silent. Like Lol Stein, Ernesto knows something others cannot understand – and if they do, they do so only through strange half-epiphanies they cannot put into words. But this secret knowledge renders them both passive. Lol seems to understand the true meaning of passion, and it makes her a voyeur. Ernesto seems to understand even the origins of the universe, and the best he can make of his knowledge is to state that ‘it doesn’t matter’.

If that sounds muddled and pretentious, that’s because it would take a genius like Ernesto to analyse a novel like this without tying oneself up in metaphysical knots. And yet, if you refrain from trying to analyse everything as you go and just read, somehow the effect of the whole is simple, affecting, and haunting.

The story unfolds as something of a part-novel, part-play – but it’s like a play that contains itself in the text, not one that is meant to be performed. In fact, it would probably lose a lot in performance because, to me at least, the book is all about the ambiguity of the words on paper. (I can’t really imagine the minimalism on film, and I’m not sure I’d even like to see Les Enfants – even if it was there first!) Amidst all the ambiguity, there is a good deal of absurd humour… but of course, now that I think about it I can’t pin-point what exactly is so funny: the humour isn’t in ‘funny moments’, but about the entire world being a little askew.

The best thing I can do is give you a taster and let you make of it what you will. Here you have a random chunk of dialogue, translated by me. (This is towards the end, but I don’t think it counts as a spoiler; ‘plot’ obviously isn’t conventional here.) A newspaper reporter has been sent to interview Ernesto and he asks the parents when they first noticed their son was special.

REPORTER: Perhaps some particular circumstance or incident, madam… if you could recall even one detail, one small thing… that sticks in your mind…

FATHER: What about the scissors, they might do…

MOTHER: Aye, that’s right… wait a minute…

Mother remembers it perfectly.

MOTHER: Aye, one day, the boy is three years or something, he comes to me crying and shouting: I can’t find my scissors I can’t find my scissors… And I say that there’s nothing to it but to think where you’ve left them. The boy says: I can’t think I can’t think. Then I say: Well that’s all we need now. What do you mean you can’t think? Then the boy answers: I can’t think, because if I think, I’ll think I’ve thrown them out of the window.

Silence. An atmosphere of emptiness.

REPORTER: I’m sorry, madam, but… no matter how intelligent you are, how could you have guessed your son’s extraordinariness from this?

Silence.

MOTHER: Well now I don’t understand a word you’re saying, sir. This is getting a bit dull.

The reporter sighs. Silence. Pondering. Then the reporter speaks. More and more, he takes on the parents’ mannerisms.

REPORTER: I only mean, madam, that your story about the scissors has nothing at all to do with the case at hand, that is the rejection of the school system…

FATHER: We’re not so stupid either, my wife and I, so take care what you say, sir.

REPORTER: I’m awfully sorry, sir and madam, I was only trying to say that even if madam weren’t especially intelligent, a story like this, the story of the scissors for instance, would have enchanted her for the simple reason that it happened to her own son.

Silence, finally broken by the mother.

MOTHER: Good sir. This reasoning of yours will lead nowhere. And here I thought you’d understood what this is all about. Believe me when I say: nobody could understand what Ernesto said, nobody. Except me. And this is precisely because I don’t even try to explain it.

Silence. An atmosphere of emptiness. The reporter feels deflated again.

Final Verdict: Strange book. I loved it, but I have no idea why exactly.

French edition: Gallimard  1994 (orig. 1990)  149 pp.  ISBN: 2070387054. The English editions appear to be out of print, alas – but hunting down a second-hand copy is worth it if the excerpt above struck you at all as ‘intriguing’ rather than ‘pointless’.

11 comments on “FRANCE WEEK: Marguerite Duras: La pluie d’été / Summer Rain

  1. Moira
    July 19, 2008

    How about “intriguingly pointless”? That seems to about cover it …

  2. Jackie
    July 19, 2008

    This must be a strange and compelling novel. You’ve piqued my curiosity, Leena, especially since I’d like to know what happens to the family. I thought the excerpt was amusing, too.

  3. RosyB
    July 19, 2008

    You say you read this in the French? I was just wondering in relation to the week’s post on translations how you think this might work in translation to English. You say it is simple but the style sounds very enigmatic – would that work in English as well do you think?

    I may be talking nonsense but knowing that you speak a number of languages, Leena, I always find it fascinating what people who are multi-lingual thinks of the character of those languages and how they might or not fit with a style or character of a particular book.

    I have a few multi-lingual (is that a word?) friends who say they feel almost like a slightly different character when speaking in different languages – almost as though the language itself pushes you into a particular way of expressing yourself. Talking of which, I’m not expressing myself at all well.

    Basically I wondered how on earth a translator might tackle the following:

    “words either fail, transcend meaning, or mean more than they say; all meaning in the novel is fluid, and all true knowledge keeps silent”

  4. RosyB
    July 19, 2008

    Sorry, to clarify, I meant how a translator might tackle a book that does the following – not how they might translate that sentence! :)

  5. Moira
    July 20, 2008

    Marguerite Duras wrote the screenplay for “Hiroshima Mon Amour”. That much I do know about her – but I know precious little about her personal life.

    I have to admit to being amazed that you read it in French, Leena. I think I’d have hurled it across the room in total frustration before I got part way through.

    What IS it you like so much about something that so plainly baffles you?

    Or are you too baffled to say?

    (Isn’t ‘baffle’ a lovely word? Baffle, baffle, baffle … )

  6. marygm
    July 22, 2008

    I loved the exchange in the extract! Not quite so sure about the stage instructions type part but I’ll have to read this book – and for once, a book I can get from the library! :)

  7. Pingback: Lost and Found: What would you like to see back in print? « Vulpes Libris

  8. richard dixon
    June 14, 2010

    I have just finished this book and, although I love Duras’ other works, I must say, this one leaves me bewildered. I read it in one go, was puzzled by the rather pointlessness and pseudo-heaviness of the mysterious dialogue. I recommend her War Memoirs. Much better.
    By the way, I did come across a second-hand copy of Duras’s book in English. I will GIVE it to anyone who wants it. It won’t occupy much of a spot in my library, alas.

  9. smart rose
    October 9, 2010

    very urgent for guys who already read or studied this novel
    please answer me I am gonna choose this novel for my research
    I just want to know if this novel contains post-colonial features, especially “Gender prospective” and “Diaspora” or “psychological exile”
    I am waiting for your reply
    thanks in advance

  10. nanoubix
    May 28, 2011

    To Moira and Richard – contrary to you, I found this novel the least ‘pointless’ of Marguerite Duras’ work. It is an absolutely beautiful novel and I can only recommend it to everyone who has ever wondered about the point of it all.

    It has a bit of the poetic philosophy of Luce Irigaray, a philosophy of doubt, a sensibility of things one knows intuitively about and that can never be translated in words, even by the most skilled and knowledgeable writer. Maybe Duras set herself the challenge to do it. What we are left with, at the end, is ‘l’inexplicable’.

    To RosyB – the translated extract by Leena is close to the original text. Being bilingual, I feel it translates very well. However, I would need to read the whole translation to be sure.

    Which brings me to Richard again – I would love to receive the English copy if it is still available. Thanks!

  11. voicewithinsilence
    November 9, 2011

    The philosophy of Duras. Duras is not just a merely style. All these characters full of emptiness .Loved to read this post :)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Information

This entry was posted on July 19, 2008 by in Entries by Leena, Fiction in translation, Fiction: literary and tagged , .

Categories

Archive

Editorial Policy

The views expressed in the articles and reviews on Vulpes Libris are those of the authors, and not of Vulpes Libris itself.

Quoting from Vulpes Libris

You are very welcome to quote up to 100 words from any article posted on Vulpes Libris - as long as you quote accurately, give us due credit and link back to the original post. If you would like to quote MORE than 100 words, please ask us first via the email address in the Contact details.

Acknowledgment

  • (The header image is from Aesop's Fables, illustrated by Francis Barlow (1666), and appears courtesy of the Digital and Multimedia Center at the Michigan State University Libraries.)
  • Follow

    Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

    Join 977 other followers

    %d bloggers like this: