At the End of the Day

I didn’t do a literary degree, although the biography of famous historical players and politicians does bend one that way – if only because such characters are often larger than the characters in novels. More often than not, fiction authors too are eccentric or otherwise fascinating: but they tend to come out of the process with many plaudits and total control, whereas their fiction characters may at best go through nightmares, or at worst come to a sticky end.

It occurred to me the other day that some revealing biographies could come out of reversing the roles, whereby the book’s lead hero or villain becomes the writer, and the writers get to suffer whatever verdict their characters might have in mind for them. But one would have to give the character only those motives ascribed to them by the author….and try to give the creator that which he or she deserved. Anything else, my sense of fair play tells me, would be offside.

Count Dracula, for example, had very few redeeming features (they were teeth, mainly) but he’s always struck me as vengeful. His book might be called Bram Stoker gets it in the Neck, or perhaps Stoker’s bloodless coup. As it happens, Bram in real life did get it in the neck – his end was very bloody indeed – but that’s neither here nor there: we’re talking fanciful biography, not scholarly treatise.

Mary Shelley’s monster put together by Baron Frankenstein was, by contrast, a sad and really quite harmless chap who might pen one of those Tragic Childhood epics called, say, Mommie Dearest. Raskalnikov would probably write off the author of Crime and Punishment with a hatchet job, The Tosh of Dostoyevsky.

In this game of rôle reversal, you wouldn’t want to be Oscar Wilde: the poor old dear had a downfall worse than most as it was, but can you imagine letting Dorian Gray loose with quill and parchment? It would be pure Peter Mandelson from start to finish. I’m thinking titles like The Secret Uphill Gardener, The Bladder in Reading Gaol, The Windy career of a Lady’s Fanny, and 1001 tortures of an Irish Queen.

It’s a rich seam, this one: What the Butler bore by Jeeves, Conan the Barbarian by Sherlock Holmes, The Life of Mainly Aimless by Lucky Jim, and so on.

But I can’t think of any authors who would have to endure more slings and arrows in this game than Charles Dickens. Shakespeare’s plays may have had more characters, but almost all of them were real figures from history. In terms of the novel as we understand it, Dickens created more hostages to fortune than David Cameron.

It might be a veritable charactercade of complaint: Please can we have no More by Oliver Twist; Great Expectorations by Pip; and What a time to die by Edwin Drood.

Alternatively, the characters could take the approach of writing their own self-exculpatory memoirs. I lost my head over a Woman by Charles Darnley; I never ‘it ‘er ‘onest by Bill Sykes; and- perhaps most revealing of all – I was Dickens’ double by David Copperfield.

8 thoughts on “At the End of the Day

  1. John, I also didn’t study any classics but I think it will come back as the liberal arts supersede modern Ford-inspired compulsory education. We are unable to stuidy what the classics told us about powerful state overreach during Greece and Rome as we’ve been systematically dumbed down. Think John Taylor Gatto, read up on the Trivium (GnosticMedia.com)

    This will be us in 2045:

    https://jeremystocks.wordpress.com/2016/01/12/do-they-know-its-diwali/

    More “Bangra Aid” than Band Aid!

    Like

  2. IP, you think that’s bad – get an eyeful of this one as an explanation for the happenings in Germany (and elsewhere) on NYE:

    “From the British point of view, one striking opportunity to respond will be presented in the referendum over Britain’s membership (or not) in the European Union, slated to take place at some point next year. That Union – which has dissolved the continent’s external and internal borders as a central pillar of its policy — may now be seen by British voters for what it is. And so perhaps the best explanation of the behaviour of the German government is that it has been taken over some time ago by British Euro-sceptics, intent on finally bringing the EU to this dismal end. That is clearly the most likely explanation. Mere insanity, incompetence or duplicity could not possibly explain the behaviour of a German government so obviously dedicated to its own pathetic end.

    The bold marking is mine, the complete article can be read here:

    http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/7201/germany-migrant-policy

    Who’d ‘ave thunk that Nigel and his UKIP had so much influence? We all know that the final responsibility rests with the parson’s daughter and her familiars, but that there could have been British involvement?

    Like

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