Jonathan’s Comments (group member since Oct 24, 2013)

Jonathan’s comments from the Reading Proust's In Search of Lost Time in 2014 group.

Dave wrote: "Ok, what I was going to comment on is back near the beginning of the volume. What did you think of the Narrator's involvement with the Sûreté?"

I thought that the whole incident with the little girl and her parents was sinister really, but also it seemed 'added on'. It seemed that the narrator was already known by the authorities. I thought it was the initial act of finding a little girl and taking her home more important than the subsequent brush with the law as that seemed quite a reasonable consequence of his actions.

Whilst skimming through the Penguin synopsis to try to find something I just noticed that in the paragraph before we hear about the telegram announcing Albertine's death, the narrator contemplates whether he would recover the 'freedom to live' if Albertine were to die.

Dave wrote: "I found that quite realistic. In my own interior monologue I am always reasonable and gallant! ;) ..."

Ha! Ha! I know what you mean. Although I find certain aspects of the narrator's views surprising, it is realistic the meandering, torturous thought patterns, the self-deception, the contradictions, the lying, etc. We're all guilty of these things. I found his reactions to Albertine's death very interesting in that it was very unemotional.

Dave wrote: "I agree that he is human, to the degree that it takes all sorts. Just how far past the death have you folks read? What specifically is the last "action" this week. I have a comment to make, but I'm..."

This week's section ends with Aimé's letter about his adventures with the laundress.

I feel that Proust is directly addressing us, the readers of ISOLT, in a couple of sections. Firstly the bit where he recounts a novel that he'd read where the protagonists don't do what the reader expects of them, and secondly, the bit where he's trying to remember whether Albertine blushed when the narrator mentioned her suspected relations with Andrée:

...for it is often only long afterwards that we long to know what attitude a person adopted at a moment when we were paying no attention to it, an attitude which, later on, when we think again of our conversation, would elucidate an agonising problem.

Is this the situation we find ourselves in with regards to the characters of the novel?

I must admit I was dumbstruck when I read this:

Why had she not said to me: "I have those tastes"? I would have yielded, would have allowed her to gratify them.

Would you Marcel? Would you really?

Renato wrote: "He spent so long trying to find out all about Albertine's actions when she was away from him, and imagining the worse things she could possibly be doing,.."

He admits that what he really wanted to do with any evidence of Albertine's misdeeds was to confront her so it is a bit odd that he still wants to find out after her death what she did or didn't get up to. Even when Aimé does uncover the business with the laundress he soon starts to wonder how much he can trust this information; was she bragging or fantasising?

Isn't it amazing how he just gets people to run around doing errands for him, particularly St-Loup and Aimé?

Renato wrote: "So after wondering in the beginning of this week if Albertine would end up dying abruptly like Agostinelli did, we soon learn she did! I'm surprised he didn't think it was all a plot on her side to..."

I'd inadvertently read that Albertine died so I knew what was coming but I didn't realise that it was going to happen so soon after fleeing from the narrator.

So, the narrator's feelings are mixed; he'd thought that he was trapped by Albertine's presence and that if she wasn't there he'd be off travelling to Venice etc. But as he admits:

...my separation from her did not in the least throw open to me the field of possible pleasures which I had imagined to be closed to me by her presence.

I think the narrator's observations in this section are a bit more 'human' than in other sections, though he still can't stop feeling jealous of Albertine as he says 'in my imagination now, Albertine was free'. Oh, dear!

I've been delayed with this week's reading. I hope to read it soon, maybe tomorrow, if not, then Monday...no time for re-reading last week's either....

Dave, my Vintage edition of 'Time Regained' includes a copy of Kilmartin's 'Guide to Proust' which seems to use the Spalding book you mentioned as a starting point.

Hi y'all. This is where the Penguin editions are particularly good as they have lots of notes. So, the Penguin edition translates it in the text as great slut and has the following note:

great slut: the original expression is 'grand pied-de-grue'. This does not appear in any dictionary, including those of slang and low language, as an insult that might be addressed to a woman, though 'une grue' is a prostitute. 'Faire le pied de grue' is to wait, to be kept waiting or hanging about, but that is plainly not the meaning here. 'Slut' is an approximation.

The note in my MKE version restates this, but mentions that Grue means 'crane' and by analogy (!?) 'prostitute' and that

Faire le pied de grue = "To kick one's heels," "to stand around for a long time" - like a crane standing on one leg, or a street-walker in search of custom. Morel's use of the term is grammatically nonsensical.

Maybe it's fair to say that it's an untranslatable phrase but he's basically calling her a slut!

Renato wrote: "Also - and we'll learn more about this with Carter's bio - it seems Proust did send a letter like this to Agostinelli and talked about the plane he had bought and needed his help to undo the deal. ..."

I can't avoid learning about all these parallels with the novel and Proust's life as I'd read about some even before I started reading the novel and they're in the notes as well. I'm not too afraid of spoilers etc., but at this stage I'm just not actively seeking them out...I'm stumbling across quite a few accidentally though.

Renato wrote: "But St Loup did meet her in the train once, didn't he? The narrator was even jealous that Albertine was giving him too much attention or something like that..."

Yes, they met on the station at Doncières and chatted for about an hour, which fuelled the narrator's jealousy of course. It doesn't necessarily mean that he connects the photograph with the girl at the station, but his reaction suggested that he knew her from elsewhere...or am I getting drawn in by the narrator's paranoia?

He seems to be getting worse at the moment :-)

Dave wrote: "Hey folks, just wanted to let you know I was enjoying your comments. I can't think of anything to add for now."

That's ok Dave. I hope your post-Proust reading is progressing well?

Isn't the narrator's plan of getting St-Loup to offer money to Mme Bontemps just creepy...and crazy? Isn't this symptomatic of everything he does though? i.e. over-analysed, overly complicated, morally dubious...and I suppose, an attempt to exert his power - through his money.

And isn't his letter to Albertine both cruel and manipulative? Especially when he claims that he was just on the verge of marrying her with his mother's consent. The funny thing is that I don't think Albertine believes this at all as she can now see through him - I'll probably be proved wrong though!

I thought Albertine's reply to this vindictive letter was amusing, starting with 'My dear friend, thank you for all your kind remarks...'

Renato wrote: "And speaking of St-Loup, what was all that evilness about? It reminded me of Morel the way he was scheming and talking to the footmen. This is yet another instance where we find out more layers abo..."

I think Proust just wanted to show a darker side to St-Loup, just as he's done with the other characters; maybe he was thinking that St-Loup was a bit too much of an angelic character up to this point. :-)

I'm interested in St-Loup's reaction to the photo of Albertine as he seems to recognise her. As the narrator notices that his reaction is similar to the narrator's reaction when he recognised Rachel I was surprised that he didn't question St-Loup further. He seems to think that St-Loup is just amazed of Albertine's plainness...but I'm not so sure that's it at all.

Renato wrote: "Sixth volume! Wow!
I-want-her-I-don't-want-her... talk about that later! I want to know about Charlus! ..."

I know what you mean Renato, but now she's left - he wants her...or does he? he! he!

Through Albertine's letters we actually get to see her thoughts and ideas a bit more. And our illustrious narrator's immediate reaction on reading the first letter is: 'she doesn't mean a word of what she says', that she's being used by her aunt to get her hands on his 'fortune'.

He does calm down a bit, and I was quite amazed that he actually wondered what it was that Albertine wanted - is this the first time that he's done this? i.e. considered her point-of-view.

Faced with Albertine's flight he's even prepared to give up on Venice and 'grant' her some independence - how thoughtful. :-)

Renato wrote: "... I need this break-up to be definitive. I hope she gets married or something..."

I also hope that Albertine does not return...it should shake things up a bit then.

Renato wrote: "Jonathan, thank you for starting this topic. I'm as into cinema as I am into literature, so I'll definitely be checking out everything posted here next year.

Thanks for all the great information, ..."

I thought it was a bit odd that we didn't have a film thread, especially as we'd mentioned films quite a bit before. If we watch any of these films then we can post our thoughts here as well.

I wasn't aware of the 'Celeste' film. There's more cinematic material than I thought.

Oh wow! Thanks Marcelita.

I've checked out some of the links - great stuff! Next year, when I become a Proust graduate, I'm going to trawl through your pinterest info, as there's such a wealth of info on it.

Presumably, you've seen the 'Captive' film; is it any good? I'm sometimes a bit wary of adaptions that change too much as they seem to cut away a lot of the interesting stuff IMO.

I feel that it should be ok to watch if it's only covering the one novel, so no spoilers etc.

Of course, there is also the Pinter screenplay, which sounds intriguing.