A Compromise Which Ends in Tears

Hello Gentle Reader

It been almost a week since the Swedish Academy erupted into a public and catastrophic crisis, over issues regarding sexual misconduct of a members husband, a members lack of good faith and strict compliance with the academy’s statutes of privacy and confidentiality, as well as financial assistance offered to the same member and her husband, by the Swedish Academy, which in its own result ended in an internal statute being broken. This saw to the public resignations of three members, and a whirlwind of controversy and media storm followed. It required his Majesty the King of Sweden to intervene on the mater, and was deeply criticized by the Nobel Foundation, who felt the current behavior of the Swedish Academy, had damaged the Nobel Prize for Literature. There have been calls for the royal patronage to dismiss all members who currently sit on the Swedish Academy and one in four Swedes support this decision. As the Swedish Academy’s failure to govern itself with integrity and conduct itself with decorum, has reached unprecedented levels, it seems they have met and agreed upon a compromise, that is both promising and saddening at the same time.

From what can be gathered from the evidence, the Academy was split into two camps – roughly based around the voting that took place earlier, to decide whether or not to exclude Katarina Frostenson (the academy member charged with leaking Nobel Prize information as well as receiving financial assistance with her husband to operate the club called the Forum); with some minor adjustments.

Roughly, it would appear the first camp was led by former Permanent Secretary of the Swedish Academy, Horace Engdahl—who recently criticized Sara Danius in her role as Permanent Secretary of the Swedish Academy, stating she above all others before her, had absolutely failed in her position. This camp voted to retain Katarina Frostenson as a member of the Swedish Academy, and consisted of:

Chair No. 17 – Horace Engdahl (Leader)

Chair No. 2 – Bo Ralph

Chair No. 3 – Sture Allén

Chair No. 4 – Anders Olsson

Chair No. 5 – Göran Malmqvist

Chair No. 6 – Tomas Riad

Chair No. 9 – Jayne Svenungsson

Chair No. 14 – Kristina Lugn

Chair No. 18 – Katarina Frostenson

The opposing group was led by Permanent Secretary of the Swedish Academy Sara Danius. This group voted to exclude Katarina Frostenson, on the charges she was accused of not only within the academy’s statutes, but also accepting financial funding from the academy while being member of the Swedish Academy, and of course the controversy her husband brought on. This group consisted of:

Chair No. 7 – Sara Danius (Leader)

Chair No. 8 – Jesper Svenbro

Chair No. 10 – Peter Englund

Chair No. 11 – Klas Östergren

Chair No. 12 – Per Wästberg

Chair No. 16 – Kjell Espmark

Chair no. 13 – Sara Stridsberg*

[Though she originally did not vote on the matter, has recently thrown her support behind Sara Danius]

The following two members have been removed from the discussion and the Academy, and did not or do not, officially belong to either side; and are considered inactive.

Chair No. 1 – Lotta Lotass

Chair No. 15 – Kerstin Ekman

In the end the Swedish Academy has been forced to put aside their differences—and it has been mentioned Anders Olsson was called upon to act as a mediator between the divide, and come to a conclusion and compromise. A deal seems to have been bet, but with tears.

First: Katarina Frostenson, with the charges of leaking Academy information to third parties knowing or otherwise, which may have had personal and financial benefits; seeking financial support from the Swedish Academy with a business she owned with her husband, among other allegations of misconduct; resigned from her seat within the Swedish Academy of Chair No. 18. She will no longer participate in the dealings and decisions of the Swedish Academy going forward.

Second: Sara Danius, must step down as the Permanent Secretary of the Swedish Academy; a decision which was not met with enthusiasm by all. Sara Stidsberg, reportedly was in tears over the decision, as she supported Sara Danius through the fickle and controversy an came to her defense now more than ever; but walked with Sara Danius after the meeting was held, and she announced her resignation. But if it meant repairing the academy, and beginning to move forward with the great work the institution does, Sara Danius was gracefully and with honour and integrity stepped down from her role as Permanent Secretary of the Swedish Academy, and has reportedly resigned from the Swedish Academy as well.

It’s a sad day for the Swedish Academy, some members—such as Horace Engdahl—believes this departure will allow the Swedish Academy to reclaim its former glory, and place in its position as a once important national and international institution. Others offer warnings that the Swedish Academy will merely go back to its good old boys club days, the very days Sara Danius tried to end, while modernizing and revolutionizing the Swedish Academy to participate with the grander world. Now those plans are tossed into limbo.

But the support for Sara Danius has been pouring in all over. The academy members who left before her: Peter Englund, Klas Östergren, Kjell Espmark, have released a joint statement, where they praised Sara Danius for her leadership and demeanor during the events which had transpired.

“We want to emphasize that throughout this crisis she acted with great integrity and calm determination. We want to express our wholehearted support for her in this difficult moment,”

            [The Joint Statement Stated]

In the end I hope Peter Englund, Klas Östergren, Kjell Espmark, Sara Stridsberg, and any other member of the Swedish Academy, can come to Sara Danius side and toast a drink to her, and give her support. But for those who really mean it, truly surround her, and support her during this difficult and unfortunate time, as she made a difficult decision to propel the Swedish Academy forward, and reignite its dying flame of integrity, with her own.

As for Katarina Frostenson, there is little that needs to be said on the matter. She only resigned on this condition, as she herself could not due the honest act in the first place, which first propelled the Swedish Academy into its current situation. With regards to Göran Malmqvist, I have few and choice words for, he described the meeting as difficult, but Sara Danius’s decision as ‘wise.’ Still I can’t help feel that on a few occasions, Göran Malmqvist betrayed his position with the Swedish Academy and as a sinologist at times, which resulted in a Chinese government approved patsy to win the Nobel Prize for Literature. But I had little respected for Malmqvist before now, and none certainly now. Sture Allen, a previous Permanent Secretary, apparently has known about the claims of Sexual Abuse for some decades now, when he first received a letter from a young woman accusing the husband of Katarina Frostenson, of sexual misconduct. Sture Allen, reportedly disregarded the letter as ‘not important.’

What does this mean for the Swedish Academy? Of eighteen chairs, only eleven are active and filled; meaning the Swedish Academy cannot hold a quorum, and no major decisions can be made at this time. It is unclear yet, if former members who recently resigned will return to their posts, or if new provisions will be adopted to allow academy members to resign. As for the Nobel, the crisis has severely damaged its integrity. There is no word on whether it will be awarded this year or not.

If the Swedish Academy chooses not award the Nobel Prize for Literature on grounds of reprieve and respite it is understandable. There is a lot of work that needs to be done to rebuild the reputation of both the Swedish Academy and the Nobel Prize for Literature.  

In the end, my sympathies go out to Sara Danius. Her tenure as Permanent Secretary of the Swedish Academy, was short, but she proved to master the task of announcing the Literature prize, dealing with the media on an official capacity and perhaps reinvigorating the award itself. I wish her the best of luck in her future, and know she had a magnificent job, despite what others may say. Her resignation is sad and heartbreaking, as much as it is tragic for the Swedish Academy, who refused to do the right honest action when called to.

The Best of Luck Sara Danius.

M. Mary


Post Script - Edit & Update - 

After Sara Danius' resignation Sweden erupted in support for the former Permanent Secretary and members of the Swedish Academy. Politicians, the public, writers, and former members of the Swedish Academy, all wore puss bow styled blouses or scarves in support of Danius. Meanwhile, Anders Olsson has become the temporary Permenant Secretary of the Swedish Academy, but has found himself in a bit of hot water with his royal patron, His Majesty King Carl XVI Gustaf, by implying the His Majesty, was complicate or even active in the resignation of Sara Danius, to help resolve the crisis within the Swedish Academy. The Royal family's press office, has denied this claim vehemently, and in a meeting with Anders Olsson was held, where an explanation for the comment was sought. 

Kjell Espmark, one of the three members who resigned first in protest, has drafted a formal and official request for resignation from the Swedish Academy. Currently, as it stands all chairs on the Swedish Academy are occupied for life. Since the crisis had first become public, there have been suggestions of reforms to the membership status of the Swedish Academy, whereupon His Majesty the King, would amend provisions, which will allow members to resign and be replaced. However, there has been no further word on whether or not this reform will take place, at this time. To reiterate, the Swedish Academy, now only has eleven members, and requires twelve to hold a quorum to make decisions, such as electing and appointing new members. 

This will most certainly will not be the last we have heard about the Swedish Academy and its current state of duress. For now, we must wait to see what will happen going forward, and see how the Academy will regain the confidence and trust, while re instituting faith and prestige in the Nobel Prize for Literature, which it most certainly has tarnished. 

For Further Reading -- 


https://www.sydsvenskan.se/2018-04-12/efter-krismotet-danius-och-frostenson-lamnar

http://www.cbc.ca/news/entertainment/nobel-swedish-academy-head-resigns-1.4616997

https://www.thelocal.se/20180413/swedish-academys-first-female-head-ousted-after-metoo-scandal

http://time.com/5238852/nobel-swedish-academy-resignation/

https://www.svt.se/kultur/bok/las-ostergren-jag-lamnar-in-en-formell-begaran-om-uttrade

https://www.sydsvenskan.se/2018-04-12/efter-krismotet-danius-och-frostenson-lamnar

Previous Blogposts on the Matter -- 

Shocking News from the Swedish Academy 

Swedish Academy Controversy (Continued) 

Horace Engdahl Speaks Out 

A Shadow Over the Swedish Academy Darkens

Hello Gentle Reader

Gone are the days when I could sit and moan how Bob Dylan had tarnished (if only slightly) the Nobel Prize for literature. After all he was (or is) a, has been, burned out hippie, who brought no real merit or revolution to literature or poetry. He is credited for revolutionizing music, with his folk like lyrics, and blues guitar style. No one of which either concerned or interested me, and nor does any justification, rationalization, or explanation of why he deserved the prize. His name sets my teeth on edge, his award grates my nerves—and these facts are well known, as friends and family, chose opportune moments to bring it up and send me in a rant, only to slink out of the vicinity while rave to myself, like a lunatic. But recent events overshadow Bob Dylan’s Nobel Prize piss off, and even make his award appear like a minor controversy, in comparison to the continual catastrophic crisis which currently assaults the Swedish Academy; the sickening thought is: it is members of the Swedish Academy who publicly assault it; advertently and inadvertently.

Everyday more news comes out with regards to the scandal of the Swedish Academy, and more people are weighing on it. The condemnation, of the Swedish Academy cannot ring clearer, as it is criticized for failing to govern itself with integrity; and how a certain member—Katarina Frostenson—has failed to possess the character, constitution, and dignity to remove herself from the Academy due to her poor conduct, her violation of its statutes, and for not operating in good faith for the Swedish Academy as an institution; and instead chose to benefit herself and her husband Jean-Claude Arnault (who stands accused of vast allegations of sexual misconduct over several years).

So far the crisis has forced three members to publicly resign, with a fourth considering handing in her resignation. The Royal patronage of His Majesty Carl XVI Gustaf has also been forced to weigh in on the crisis, where he had an emergency meeting with Permanent Secretary of the Swedish Academy Sara Danius, over the issues currently plaguing the Academy. The Nobel Foundation (the administrative and financial body of all Nobel Prizes) has also been forced to publicly denounce the conduct of the Swedish Academy, and worries about the damage done to the Nobel Prize for Literature and its reputation, as the members internal squabbling continues to become a public point of discussion.

In response to the resignation of his fellow members, the former Permanent Secretary of the Swedish Academy, Horace Engdahl, released a public letter to a leading Swedish newspaper, expressing his disgust towards his fellow members—who he called a clique of sore losers; and blames them for the current damage done to the Swedish Academy, and the perilous circumstances it has placed the Nobel Prize for Literature into. Engdahl also goes on to criticize the current Permanent Secretary of the Swedish Academy, who he accuses of being unable to perform the duties of her position, and has allowed the Academy to split and divide in this matter. Though one only needs to wonder, what his goal was with this letter, if it was an attempt at calming the waters, or to only stoke the raging fires already burning in the furnaces, which only damages the reputation of the Swedish Academy further, which he accuses the three members of doing so prior.

Horace Engdahl’s antics and public criticism of the three members who have publicly resigned, as well as the current Permanent Secretary, have not gone unnoticed. His ex-wife, Ebba Witt-Brattström, a scholar of comparative literature, unleashed a rebuttal against her former husband’s remarks. Ebba Witt-Brattström confesses while they were married (1989-2014) Horace Engdahl often told her, who would receive the Nobel Prize for Literature; but she clarifies he could trust her. This is quite different from the situation of Katarina Frostenson and her husband Jean-Claude Arnault; as the narrative can be painted that husband Jean-Claude Arnault used the information for business and capital purposes within his club, or on the betting sites. Those who will remember, days before the announcement Patrick Modiano shot through the betting sites list with assured fury. Ebba Witt-Brattström believes the Academy is also in an internal crisis between tradition and old ways, and the proposed renovations and modernizations by Sara Danius, have forced a divide between two competing camps within the academy, led by Sara Danius and Horace Engdahl, respectively. One of the defectors from the Swedish Academy, Kjell Espmark, responded to Engdahl’s letter by stating: “There is no honour left in the body of that man.”

In closing, His Majesty Carl XVI Gustaf has opened up about amending the provisions of the Academy’s membership, and is entertaining the idea of allowing authors to withdraw from the Swedish Academy, and have their seats filled. As the Royal Patron of this important cultural institution, His Majesty believes he is in not only his right and authority to make the amendment, but it is also the appropriate action at this time. In the event that this amendment was to take place, perhaps Katarina Frostenson will do the only honest and sensible thing she can do: resign from Chair No.18, and allow the Swedish Academy to repair itself and wash the rust and scum she and her husband have forced it into.

Thank-you For Reading Gentle Reader

Take Care

And As Always

Stay Well Read

M. Mary

Prior Blog Posts –

Shocking News from The Swedish Academy

Swedish Academy Crisis (Continued)

Horace Engdahl Speaks Out

For Further Reading –

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/04/11/world/europe/swedish-academy-sex-nobel.html

http://royalcentral.co.uk/europe/sweden/king-carl-xvi-gustaf-comments-on-the-crisis-in-the-swedish-academy-100163

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/04/11/king-sweden-considers-using-royal-powers-break-nobel-deadlock/

https://www.expressen.se/nyheter/witt-brattstrom-horace-lackte-nobelpristagare-till-mig/

https://www.expressen.se/nyheter/kungen-overvager-att-agera-mot-svenska-akademien/

Horace Engdahl Speaks Out

Hello Gentle Reader

As previously mentioned now on a few different occasions, the Swedish Academy is emblazed in a public crisis, with regards to one of its members (Katarina Frostenson), who may have used her position on the Swedish Academy to lobby for financial assistance from the academy for her husband’s artistic club the Forum, as well as leaked information about who the new winners for the Nobel Prize would be. Frostenson’s husband Jean-Claude Arnault has been accused by eighteen women of sexual assault, harassment, and misconduct. Recently the academy held a vote on whether or not to exclude (or rather expel) Katarina Frostenson from the Swedish Academy and its dealings. The votes were cast, and Frostenson was permitted to retain her seat on the academy, which saw the public resignations of three academy members in protest, and the possibility of forth still to come.

For more detail and further information please see the previous two posts:

Shocking News from the Swedish Academy

Swedish Academy Controversy (Continued)

Horace Engdahl is a somewhat mercurial figure. He can be a literary curmudgeon who scoffs, sneers, and derides the current way literature is being upheld as anything important in society. He often vents these vexations publicly, and often stirs great controversy when doing so. Who could forget his remarks ten years ago, when he called American literature: “ignorant and insular,” and that America could not “challenge Europe as the center of the literary world,” and gave the most scathing remark yet: “they don't translate enough and don't really participate in the big dialogue of literature ...That ignorance is restraining.” On these grounds, I agree with the former Permanent Secretary of the Swedish Academy. His criticisms were justified, the lack of translation is appalling (though steps have been made), and its true American and dare I say English (or British) writers/readers in general, are rather self-proclaiming as the masters of literature; where in reality they are most likely overtly hyped and a bit pompous and boring. On these grounds, I often find myself on the side of Horace Engdahl, mainly because I too like to consider myself a dry curmudgeon who can’t stand the state that the literary world is in.

Often on the contrary though, Horace Engdahl can be a bit to open about his criticisms, and in these moments appear to be self-serving some ulterior agenda. In a recent open letter to the Swedish newspaper Expressen, the former Permanent Secretary unleashes his uncontrolled bile, vitriol, and condemnation towards his three former colleagues and members of the Swedish Academy, as well as the current Permanent Secretary of the Swedish Academy.

Horace Engdahl begins his letter by going over the first time a similar crisis had taken place; back in nineteen-eighty nine, when Ayatollah Khomein issued a fatwa (death sentence) against Salman Rushdie for his controversial novel “The Satanic Verses.” At the time writers, governments, writers organizations and movement, cultural institutions, governments and the public themselves, all condemned the barbaric order, and protected or sought to protect Salman Rushdie (literally and figuratively). The Swedish Academy, however, at the time decided to remain silent, a fact that did not bode well for certain members. Kerstin Ekman, and the late Lars Gyllensten, and the late Werner Aspenström—all resigned in protest. Engdahl criticizes this move, which he calls: “abandoning their duty to the academy and its community, only to fling themselves into the arms of the media, and claim moral superiority.” Engdahl goes on to state; this move damaged the Academy’s reputation and severely upended the work of the Academy, as their seats have sat vacant for many years— Kerstin Ekman’s still does.

Horace Engdahl then changes his attention towards the current situation. Though he admits what happened in nineteen-eighty nine had the airs of ‘tragic dignity,’—he calls the current situation an abhorrent state of affairs, being brought on by a group and I quote ‘losers,’ who have chosen to resign (though not give up their seat (?)) and have broken the statues of confidentiality by bringing the public into the matter, seeking them to join the argument to oust Katarina Frostenson, by publicly resigning. Horace Engdahl eludes that is far more serious than any Nobel Prize leak a few days before announcement.  

Moving on Horace Engdahl believes the manipulator, causing this desperate power struggle is: Sara Danius, the current Permanent Secretary of the Swedish Academy; who he criticizes as being unable to take control of the situation and get a firm handle on the catastrophic events which are currently taking place. He has stated that Sara Danius has voiced her own opinion(s) as that of the perception of the Swedish Academy, who eluded that her opinions and the decision by the academy are one in the same. He has stated she has not been able to maintain a spirit of community or co-operation within the academy, nor has she moved between camps within the academy; in fact (or so Engdahl would lead us to believe) Sara Danius is only interested in maintaining her own position within the academy; and that a divide within the academy causing these leaks to the media about its internal struggles, rests solely on the hands of Sara Danius, who has been incapable of maintaining control and decorum within its walls. Horace Engdahl concludes that in its 232 years of being an institution of importance, Sara Danius has been the worst Permanent Secretary of the Swedish Academy.

I am left to wonder what Horace Engdahl had hoped to prove or otherwise achieve with this letter. If it was to pour more petrol and gas on the fire then bravo, truly bravo, your operatic statements of discontent are well noted and cannot be ignored—it’s a standing ovation. If it were to somehow defend the honour (or what little is left) Katarina Frostenson, then he failed. In the end all Horace Engdahl ended up doing was rattling the cage and stirring the fire even more. Throwing Sara Danius under the bus was both rude and unprofessional in my opinion, and does not further the Swedish Academy’s cause, it merely tarnishes its reputation further.

Thank-you For Reading Gentle Reader

Take Care

And As Always

Stay Well Read

M. Mary

To Read Horace Engdahl's letter please see the following link: 

https://www.expressen.se/kultur/ide/jag-forfaras-over-raheten-i-akademiens-maktkamp/

The Best Translated Book Award 2018, Longlist

Hello Gentle Reader

I’d love to say spring is here with summer on the horizon; but as I look out my window tenacious snow clings with frozen resolve to remain. The sky is quilted and layered in whites and greys. The light is dull as nickel; and the air is chilled and uncertain. The meteorologist—a young doe eyed spring chicken, dressed in his slim fit snappy suits, and white smile—proclaims with a disingenuous smile: ‘it’ll be a slow start to spring. But we will get there. It’s coming.’ Such hallow words, from a shallow mouth, falling on tin ears. Winter won’t last forever, and springs arrival—be it delayed—will come in due time; though that does very little to console the present reality at hand. To move away from the dire weather; literary award season has once again begun. Though, it has started with controversy erupting in a few corners. The first (or perhaps renewed controversy) is the Booker Prize once again finds itself embattled in criticism over the decision to include American authors in nomination and selection; this has subsequently shadowed the Man Booker International Prizes longlist. On a further note, the Swedish Academy finds itself embattled in internal turmoil and strife. So far three members have already resigned publicly; a fourth as openly confessed she has not been a part of the Academy since two-thousand and sixteen, and fifth member is considering resigning. Members of the literary establishment within Sweden have called for the Royal patronage to dismiss all current members, on the grounds they have failed to operate and conduct themselves with integrity, and maintaining public trust. Needless to say, with the controversy erupting and swirling around the Swedish Academy many are curious and cautious about the future of the Nobel Prize for Literature. For now though Gentle Reader, we can take our gaze away from the controversy for a moment of respite and pause, and review the Best Translated Book Award, and this year’s Longlist for Fiction and Poetry.

We will begin with the Fiction Longlist. This year’s fiction longlist hosts twenty-five authors from all over the world and from a diverse linguistic and cultural background. The following list is organized at random; but is structured by: author – country – work nominated, in its English translated format.

Guðbergur Bergsson – Iceland – “Tómas Jónsson, Bestseller,”

Wolfgang Hilbig – Germany – “Old Rendering Plant,”

Anaïs Barbeau-Lavalette – Canada (Quebec) – “Suzanne,”

Santiago Gamboa – Columbia – “Return to the Dark Valley,”

Hanna Krall – Poland – “Chasing the King of Hearts,”

Naivo – Madagascar – “Beyond the Rice Fields,”

Antonio Tabucchi – Italy – “Isabel: A Mandela,”

Wu He – China – “Remains of Life,”

Amir Tag Elsir – Sudan – “Ebola76,”

Fleur Jaeggy – Switzerland/Italy – “I am the Brother of XX,”

Samanta Schweblin – Argentina – “Fever Dream,”

Johannes Urzidil – Czech Republic (German language) – “The Last Bell,”

Marie NDiaye – France – “My Heart Hemmed In,”

Rodrigo Hasbún – Bolivia – “Affections,”

Tomas Espedal – Norway – “Bergeners,”

Christine Angot – France – “Incest,”

Cristina Rivera Garza – Mexico – “The Iliac Crest,”

Rodrigo Fresán – Argentina – “The Invented Part,”

Mathias Énard – France – “Compass,”

Vivek Shanbhag – India (Kannada language) – “Ghachar Ghochar,”

Romina Paula – Argentina – “August,”

Daniel Kehlmann –Austria/Germany – “You Should Have Left,”

Antoine Volodine – France – “Radiant Terminus,”

Sergio Pitol – Mexico – “The Magician of Vienna,”

Pola Oloixarac – Argentina – “Savage Theories,”

One of the greatest reasons, why I love the Best Translated Book Award is the sheer diversity that is inducted into their lists. The award always is giving the impression that time and thought is allocated towards the compilation and decision making process. One can only imagine the intelligent discussions which take place to ensure the best results are shown; and great care (or at least it appears to be) is given to both established writers, and writers either just coming into their own or just being translated into English. This year’s longlist engulfs writers and prose works from all over the globe—from Iceland, to Argentina, to Madagascar, to Sudan, Poland and Italy, to India, to France and Germany, to China, and Quebec (Canada). The chosen novels vary not just in language or geography, but also theme, preoccupations and style. Guðbergur Bergsson’s novel (“Tómas Jónsson, Bestseller,”) is a viciously bleak comedy of vitriol, where a senile and miserable retired bank clerk, eviscerates and criticizes post-war Iceland. Hanna Krall’s novel (“Chasing the King of Hearts,”) is a potent love story during the Holocaust. Wu He fictionalizes in his novel (“Remains of Life,”) the remaining life of an aboriginal tribe in Taiwan, who in a headhunting ritual massacred the occupying/colonial forces of Japan, only to evoke the ire of the Japanese military of the 1930’s and were slaughtered to the point of virtual genocide. In experimental prose, Wu He imagines and conjures their lives and stories. Both Fleur Jaeggy in her stories (“I am the Brother of XX,”) and Wolfgang Hilbig in his novel (“Old Rendering Plant,”) evoke the tormented and tortured gothic ghosts of history and private life, and with lyricism and steel like precision they scalp and carve their dark renderings of life and society into works both haunting, admirable, and thoroughly delish—to describe these two authors would be to quote Nobel Laureate in Literature Camilo Jose Cela: “literature is the denunciation of the times one lives.” The longlist also probes the personal and private; first with Quebec actress and film director turned writer, Anais Barbeau-Lavalette, and her fictional biography (“Suzanne,”) of her where she imagines the missing and turbulent years of her artistic grandmother Suzanne Meloche; the second is Christine Angot scathing and confessional novel (“Incest,”) which recounts the story of a woman’s incestuous relationship with her father, and the lack of justice provided for her, and her mental collapse. Amir Tag Elsir writes a pointed caricature and satirically critical novel (“Ebola76,”) about the Ebola crisis which ravaged the Congo and Sudan in the nineteen-seventies. By contrast Pola Oloixarac has written a metaphysical and maximalist novel riddled with allusions, theories, trials, tribulations, eroticism; not to mention drug fueled debauched rampages and explorations, all the while those poor flawed characters seek to enact the theories and practices of eras now gone, to help themselves find their place in a modern and digitally fragmented world.

A special mention should be given to Naivo, his novel “Beyond the Rice Fields,” is a potent novel exploring the complicated history and past of the island nation, fit with colonial violence, missionaries, industrialism, and slavery; it’s a novel and a saga which explores the unfortunate preoccupations of human bondage, through experience, time, country, and life.  It is also the first novel from Madagascar to ever be translated into English.

Now the Poetry Longlist. The following list is composed at random; but structure by: author—country-work nominated; in its English translated format.

Johannes Heldén – Sweden – “Astroecology,”

Ursula Andkjaer Olsen – Denmark – “Third-Millennium Heart,”

Hirato Renkichi – Japan – “Spiral Staircase,”

Ana Ristović – Serbia – “Directions for Use,”

Ghayath Almadhoun – Sweden/Palestine – “Adrenalin,”

Wilson Bueno – Brazil – “Paraguayan Sea,”

Aase Berg – Sweden – “Hackers,”

Bhaskar Chakrabarti – India – “Things That Happen,”

Marosa di Giorgio – Uruguay – “I Remember Nightfall,”

Ryszard Krynicki – Poland – “Magnetic Point,”

Eleni Vakalo – Greece – “Before Lyricism,”

[Multiple Authors] Chinese Migrant Worker Poetry – China – “Iron Moon,”

I can offer very little commentary on the poetry selection of the prize as I am not a poetry reader, and poetry is a literary form, that I have never grown accustomed to enjoy or read. But what I can tell is the list is once again diverse, with numerous perspectives on show, truly showing the thought being placed into the selection and compilation for the award.

Without disappointing this year’s award showcases itself to being diverse, open, and extremely thoughtful in how any nominated writer is chosen or selected to being included on the longlist. If one ever lacks any idea of what good translations are out there, or has no point in which to begin their search, the Best Translated Book Award always seem to cover the most ground, and is an excellent place to begin, when looking for a new and exciting literary adventure.

Thank-you For Reading Gentle Reader

Take Care

And As Always

Stay Well Read

M. Mary

Swedish Academy Controversy (Continued)

Hello Gentle Reader

The controversy of the Swedish Academy continues to reverberate and ripple. After three members have publicly resigned, and a fourth member admitting she has no interaction with the Swedish Academy and its business since two-thousand and sixteen, and an investigation reviewing the internal operations of the academy with regards to a members husband and his privately run artistic and cultural club, and the subsequent accusations made against him with regards to sexual misconduct. As the media has quite a piece of meat to chew on, more information has come to light; many institutions and figures have now been forced to offer commentary on the situation.

It has now been confirmed to the public that the resignations of three members: Peter Englund (former Permanent Secretary), Klas Östergren, and Kjell Espmark; have resigned due to the Academy’s inability to internally govern the situation and accusations levelled against  Jean-Claude Arnault, who the academy had close dealings with, and more specifically his wife Katarina Frostenson, who is a member of the Swedish Academy, and is now being accused of using her membership to financial assist her husband via lobbying the Swedish Academy, as well as leaking information about the Nobel Prize for Literature to him.

The Academy as already mentioned held a vote on whether or not to exclude (in essence remove Frostenson) from the Academy and any business or dealings which would take place in future. We know the votes require a majority, in order for the decision to be passed. It has been recently released that the votes where broken into the following:

Chair No. 1 – Lotta Lotass – No Vote Cast (considered an inactive member)

Chair No. 15 – Kerstin Ekman – No Vote Cast (considered an inactive member)

Chair no. 13 – Sara Stridsberg – No Vote Cast (no specified reason)  

Chair No. 2 – Bo Ralph – Vote to Retain

Chair No. 3 – Sture Allén – Voted to Retain

Chair No. 4 – Anders Olsson – Voted to Retain

Chair No. 5 – Göran Malmqvist – Voted to Retain

Chair No. 6 – Tomas Riad – Voted to Retain

Chair No. 9 – Jayne Svenungsson – Voted to Retain

Chair No. 14 – Kristina Lugn – Voted to Retain

Chair No. 17 – Horace Engdahl – Voted to Retain

Chair No. 7 – Sara Danius – Voted to Exclusion

Chair No. 8 – Jesper Svenbro – Voted for Exclusion

Chair No. 10 – Peter Englund – Voted for Exclusion

Chair No. 11 – Klas Östergren – Voted for Exclusion

Chair No. 12 – Per Wästberg – Voted for Exclusion

Chair No. 16 – Kjell Espmark – Voted for Exclusion

Chair No.18 – Katarina Frostenson – Could Not Vote (for obvious reasons)   

The eight members who voted to retain Frostenson in the academy gave the reasoning that they did not feel or think that the accusations level against her, were substantial enough to have her excluded from the academy. Needless to say this decision has divided the academy with the abrupt departures of three members, and a possible fourth (Sara Stridsberg) considering departing as well.

As the crisis continues to whirl, the Swedish Royal family has also made a statement regarding the issue currently surrounding the academy. His Majesty Carl XVI Gustaf of Sweden has announced he is saddened by the current situation of the Swedish Academy. As the Academy’s patron, has informed the press that he is kept informed of the developments, and stressed the importance of the institution to strive beyond its current situation and come to a resolution sooner or later.

However, the Royal family is now being urged by some to step in and take control of the situation. One prominent literary critic, Ingrid Elam, has urged His Majesty Carl XVI Gustaf, to his patronage powers to remove all current members of the Academy and replace them. This sentiment appears to being gaining traction with other members of the public, as well as cultural institutions and literary establishments, as they feel the current members of the Swedish Academy has lost the trust of the public, damaged the institutions reputation, and even tarnished the Royal Family’s patronage. It has also been reported that His Majesty Carl XVI Gustaf, met with the Permanent Secretary of the Swedish Academy, Sara Danius, on Saturday. The conversation and meeting was a private matter, and no information has been released about it. However, it was noted that the conversation was constructive, with regards to the emerging situation.

It has also been revealed that Katarina Frostenson is accused of disclosing on seven different occasions who will receive the Nobel Prize for Literature to the Forum (the club her husband is the director of).

The Nobel Laureates who have been said to have been leaked are:

Wislwa Szymborska (1996)

Elfiede Jelienk (2004)

Harold Pinter (2005)

Jean-Marie Gustave (J.M.G) Le Clezio (2008)

Patrick Modiano (2014)

Svetlana Alexievich (2015)

Bob Dylan (2016)

Thank-you for Reading Gentle Reader, I will keep you posted and informed as more information is released.

M. Mary

For further reading please see the following Articles:

https://www.svt.se/kultur/konflikten-kring-katarina-frostenson-splittrar-akademien

http://www.cbc.ca/news/entertainment/nobel-swedish-academy-resignations-1.4611048

https://www.svt.se/kultur/svenska-akademiens-utredning-visar-kulturprofilen-lackte-uppgifter-om-sju-nobelpristagare

Shocking News from the Swedish Academy

Hello Gentle Reader

The Swedish is Academy is known for being provocative, thought provoking, unconventional, controversial, and even shocking—at least with regards to some of their decisions on who they have chosen as a Nobel Laureate in Literature. Beyond that the Swedish Academy has always been cloaked in reticence and a sense of regality do to their concealment and statues of secrecy and silence. No one is entirely in possession of the facts (at least no one on the outside), with regards to how the Swedish Academy operates behind closed doors. There has been speculation with regards to in house disagreements, lobbying, divisions and divides—though nothing evidentiary has been produced; other than a few members publicly leaving on grounds that they disagree with a internal decision, such as when Werner Aspenström, Kerstin Ekman, and Lars Gyllensten symbolically resigned or stepped away from the Academy in 1989, over the Academy’s decision not to publicly condemned the fatwa issued against Salman Rushdie, over his novel “The Satanic Verses.” In 2005 Knut Ahnlund made a similar gesture, when he stepped away from the academy in protest of Elfriede Jelinek receiving the Nobel Prize for Literature. Beyond these sporadic moments of dissidence, the Academy is otherwise tight lipped over its internal operations and workings. However, over the past few years there have been speculative rumors about internal strife going on behind those clandestine doors. The speculation arose in 2016 when the announcement for the Nobel Prize for Literature was delayed by a week. Upon the date of its announcement the decision was met with cheers and jeers; and controversy would soon erupt with Bob Dylan officially on his way to becoming a Nobel Laureate in Literature. After the literary world reeled with apocalyptic malaise and existential questions about its relevancy in a world which could no longer guarantee it its attention; and the [pop] music industry lit a joint, snorted some rails, and did its own rendition of the Charleston as it felt it reached new cultural heights of importance (needless to say every burn out hippie and forlorn rebellious youth who gravitated towards the folkish music of Dylan rejoiced with nerve grating enthusiasm). Afterwards, it was back to work for the Swedish Academy, and in 2017 they announced Kazuo Ishiguro as its most recent Nobel Laureate; again the decision seemed odd and even underwhelming—but at least he wrote something, and published in some sense of the word ‘traditional.’

The festivities of the previous year have since subsided and the Swedish Academy’s doors are once again closed, where the good academy is hard at work to once again find and crown a new Nobel Laureate in Literature. The task is daunting, but for writers it’s the lottery. Yet the good work of the Swedish Academy is now under scrutiny. As already mentioned there has been speculation with regards to an in house divide amongst the members of the Academy, though no evidence has ever been provided, recent occurrences would now begin to show that the Academy is in the dire straits of a crisis.

Three members of the Swedish Academy have recently voluntarily left, whereupon they have become inactive members. Those members are: former Permanent Secretary Peter Englund, Klas Ostergren, and Kjell Espmark, have all vacated their seats at this time. Lotta Lotass, though has not left publicly, she considers herself an inactive member of the academy, as she has not had any contact with the academy since September of 2016. The most recent inductee into the Academy: Sara Stridsberg, has also publicly confessed to considering leaving the academy as well. By these statistics, of eighteen chairs, the Swedish Academy has at the moment: five (5) inactive members, with the possibility of a sixth member also choose to dissent. This peculiar for the Swedish Academy as its members are elected for life, and their seats are not up for election until the member holding the seat dies. Sara Danius, has confessed she is not working to see if statutes can be revised or amended to allow members of the academy to voluntarily leave, and have their seat open for nomination and appointment.

The question remains: what has caused such a quick exodus of members and dissidence within the Academy? Was it Bob Dylan’s Nobel Prize for Literature? Is it old allegiances blocking objectivity? Well the answer is perhaps a more controversial then either of those two subjects. The matter is the accusation with regards to the #MeToo movemen which has spawned via social media, where women accuse their predators (often bypassing general notions of legal and judicial proceedings). Anyhow, last November, eighteen women accused a well-known cultural figure of Sweden: Jean-Claude Arnault, of sexually assaulting them. Naturally and within reason, Mr. Arnault denies the allegations, but the allegations have spread like a fungus and into the Swedish Academy.

You see Gentle Reader, Jean-Claude Arnault ran an exclusive cultural and artistic forum or club in Stockholm. It was called ‘the Forum,’ and hosted numerous performing artists, musicians, writers and other artistic people in its chic basement setting. The Swedish Academy as its own separate entity had financial investments and dealings with the forum. Beyond that: Jean-Claude Arnault is also married to a member of the Swedish Academy: Katarina Frostenson. Since the accusations the Swedish Academy has cut its financial commitments to the Forum, and even hosted a vote on whether or not to exclude (in a sense expel) Katarina Frostenson from any activities within the Academy. The vote took place and Katarina Frostenson found it in her favour. Criticism would erupt once again, as many are asking themselves and the academy, how the cultural and linguistic institution of Sweden can maintain its integrity with this kind of scandal going on? Needless to say, after the vote and a perceived weak press release, the three aforementioned members have resigned out of protest, leaving he current Permanent Secretary of the Swedish Academy, Sara Danius to right the wrongs, and put on a brave face for the academy and move forward. But it won’t be easy.

Before all this unpleasant and public business took place the Swedish Academy had consulted and hired a law firm to perform an investigation into every member’s dealings and connections with both the Forum and Jean-Claude Arnault. The Swedish Academy does admit that though it cannot be held responsible for the accusations and assaults that may have taken place, members do feel the weight of the Academy’s reputation was used to facilitate and coerce victims into the sexual acts. The investigation by the law firm did conclude that Jean-Claude Arnault had no relevance or influence on the Academy’s decisions or the Nobel Prize for Literature. However, the investigation did prove that the statute of secrecy which governs the Swedish Academy with fundamental and fanatic virtue had been broken on numerous of occasions; and that by offering financial investments or assistance to the Forum and Jean-Claude Arnault, the Academy was in a sense in conflict of interest and awarding its own members. Subsequently, the Swedish Academy broke its own rules according to Sara Danius.

At the end of the day Gentle Reader, what the future holds for the Swedish Academy is uncertain. We do know that the departed members left with the following words:

Peter Englund: “Decisions were made that I don’t believe in nor can defend, and I have therefore decided to no longer participate in the Swedish Academy’s work.”

Kjell Espmark: “leading voices within the academy put friendship and other irrelevant considerations.”

Klas Ostergren: “The Swedish Academy has for a long time had serious problems and has now tried to solve them in a way that puts obscure considerations before its own rules and which constitute a betrayal to its founders.”

Admittedly, even Sara Danius had considered removing herself from the Swedish Academy, but has stayed on. As she put it, the work the Academy does is far bigger then personal opinion or internal disagreements, and will seek to right wrongs. Currently, she is seeking to revise the rules to allow members to voluntarily leave, and have their seats open for nomination and reappointment. Chair of the Nobel Committee for the Swedish Academy Par Wästberg has stayed strong stating the Nobel Prize for Literature is by no means at risk.

Still Gentle Reader, what lies in store for the Swedish Academy and the Nobel Prize for Literature is up in the air. There are fears the Nobel Prize for Literature may not be awarded this year due to the internal conflict and controversy. Time will tell, what will happen; if anything happens. All that one can say for sure is the Academy is embroiled in scandal and internal strife. Needless to say, I do not envy the position Sara Danius now finds herself in, as she is left with fires burning on all sides, and an institutions reputation tarnished and in ruin—at least for now.

Thank-you For Reading Gentle Reader

Take Care

And As Always

Stay Well Read

M. Mary

For Further Reading Please see the Following Links - (Please Note: Some links may be in Swedish) 


https://www.aftonbladet.se/nyheter/a/l1bOoo/sara-danius-jag-ska-fortsatta-sa-lange-jag-orkar

https://www.dn.se/kultur-noje/three-members-leave-the-swedish-academy/

https://www.dn.se/kultur-noje/klas-ostergren-lamnar-svenska-akademien/

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/07/world/europe/swedish-academy-abuse-accusations.html

https://www.sydsvenskan.se/2018-04-07/stridsberg-overvager-att-lamna-akademien

The Booker Prize Crisis Thickens

Hello Gentle Reader

Due to a leaked letter, earlier this year it came to the literary world’s attention that publishers within the United Kingdom, felt the Booker Prize had lost its unique edge as a literary award, since its decided to expand itself beyond the United Kingdom and the commonwealth, and include American authors. The decision was ambivalent then, mixed with muted praise, and assaulted by the hisses and groans of those who felt betrayed and deserted by the prizes decision. The criticism has been swift and severe. The Booker Prize defends its decision for being inclusive to American authors, as an attempt to diversify the literary map and showcase talent throughout the broad spectrum of the English speaking world. Critics have lambasted this attempt at diversification as doing the complete opposite; they have stated the award has only homogenized the award, where independent publishers are being choked out, unknown authors are smothered, and the award is dominated and prevailed by already established literary figures from the United States and the United Kingdom.

Not everyone has agreed with the Armageddon prediction and criticism these publishers have voiced. Some as already stated support the decision as an act of recognizing the globalized world as a greater force of optimism and positive literary and cultural exchanges. Others have stated this desire for isolationistic principles is counterproductive, in a world which should seek to eliminate borders and boundaries of cultural exchange.

As for the American side of the argument, well they’ve been rather apathetic about the ordeal, and perhaps even slightly amused at what their presence has done for a literary award.

Now, however, prominent authors and leading critics have added their voice to the chorus, with regards to the debate surrounding the two-thousand and fourteen decisions.  Members from the Rathbones Folio Academy (the academy which awards the Folio Prize, a competitor to the Booker Prize), have added their voice of dissent against the Booker Prize’s decision. 99% of the academy members—which includes: Margaret Atwood, Jim Grace, Zadie Smith, Damian Barr and Kevin Barry; have all stated they believe the Booker Prize should reverse its decision to allow American authors for being eligible for the award.

A member of the Rathbones Folio Academy, Tessa Hadley, lamented loss the early uniqueness of the award, when it was exclusively open for writers from the United Kingdom and the Commonwealth (a term which engulfs: Ireland, South Africa, India, and Pakistan), in which the countries who share a unique post-colonial structure and history, were in a sense ‘talking,’ or having a ‘conversation,’ through the exchange of literature and perspective. Tessa Hadley explains with greater elucidation below:

“The Man Booker used to provide a point of focus each year for British and Commonwealth fiction: a sense that this had some identity-in-difference, and that British and Commonwealth novels were in some sense ‘talking to one another’ ... now it’s as though we’re perceived – and perceive ourselves – as only a subset of US fiction, lost in its margins – and, eventually, this dilution of the community of writers plays out in the writing.”’ (quoted from The Guardian article, by Sian Cain, link below)  

Even, John Banville, who originally supported the idea of the Booker Prize taking on a inclusion policy, has found the notion rather underwhelming and perhaps unsatisfactory. Banville claims the award has lost its cultural uniqueness, and as a result been reduced to a commonplace rudimentary prize, which exists only to promote and reward established authors. Banville then encourages the Booker Prize Foundation to reverse their decision, however uncomfortable it maybe.

Yet, the Booker Prize Foundation has not made any inclination it will reverse its decision and has in fact remained firm in its decision to include American authors in its selection process. Critics have also drawn up battle lines on where they stand on either decision of the award. Though the majority refute and claim the Booker Prize is now reduced to second hand glory with little to no relevance in the world; the few who support the rule change, claim the majority are paranoid and self-conscious about the new world’s competitive capabilities for an award. Yet interestingly enough, most of the squabbling and criticism comes from the United Kingdom itself, with its own writers and its own publishers. Once again, the elephant in the room remains either amused or apathetic to the situation.

Of course one only needs to wonder: the closer the prize comes to announcing its longlist and shortlist, what criticism and controversy will the judges have to endure? What accusations and allegations will they need to answer to? Needless to say, with an award fraught with discord and tension, I don't envy their position -- that is if they are influenced by this external white noise. 

Thank-you For Reading Gentle Reader

Take Care

And As Always

Stay Well Read

M. Mary

"Top authors make mass call on Man Booker to drop American writers,"

by, Sian Cain 

When The Scene is Set or The Space is Vacant

Hello Gentle Reader

My one grandmother was a great admirer of landscapes. She could often be found surveying and walk the landscape. When the weather proved to be uncooperative for a walk, she would nestle down by a window and gaze. When she gazed at the world outside she was completely absent from the present surroundings; from the daily tasks which she would afford to put off for the time being; from the daily distractions of life, which continually vies for attention and resolution. For these briefest of moments I remember her admiring and meditating—she contemplated and wondered. What exactly she contemplated and wondered about, I will never know. Yet, there was never a look of longing or resentment, just a sense of being at ease for a restful moment. After a while though the call of life would trumpet her back to the present and she would—as she often said: “carry on.”

As a child, I often found my grandmothers momentary reflective observations bewildering and even strange. I wondered when she sat at the window, if she was longing to get away or had a desire to travel or escape wherever she currently was. Her meditative silence and solemn posture, often struck me as sad and even alien. When my grandmother admired and meditated beyond the windowpane, or would slip out for morning, afternoon and evening walks—there was always a guarded sense of privacy, as if she were keeping a private and personal secret to herself. She only opened the clam now and then to admire the pearl and then snap it shut when trespassers grew near. When I viewed the same window, I only saw the same grass, the sky, the same hills, the same prairie twig trees, the same buildings, the same world. I had no patience to find the pearl in the ordinary and boring. When I accompanied her on a walk, it was trailed and shadowed by solemn silence and a reflective air. Neither of which my childhood constitution could tolerate. I often desired to break the awkward silence; but never dared to open my mouth or make a move to betray my position or presence. All the while, my grandmother would continue on her walk taking step by step, pace by pace, and moving her head in all conceivable directions as if she were looking for something or someone, and never quite finding them. Now and then, though, she would stop here and there, and just observe with casual triumph, then continue on her wandering. Yet to me, at the time, these ritual of silence, observation, reflection and meditation where beyond my comprehension and were more frightening and awkward, then they were poetically or philosophically rewarding.

Age, however, has a way of smoothing out the roughness of youth, and polishing the lens for a slightly enhanced bit of vision. The peripheral vision grows more vibrant and there is less tunnel vision. Now that I am older I finally understand my grandmother’s silent love affair with observing landscapes. The revelation, however, was not strikingly clear as an epiphany—no rather it was a slightly more gradual understanding, which took place over time. At first it made its presence subtly known through novels, especially with authors who have a certain love affair with digressions in which they offer commentary on architecture and landscape. These authors are always Intune to set the scene, and often do so, with lovingly gentle care. These same authors, however, are capable of drawing parallels between the external landscape and the internal world of the characters, using one as a symbolic external depiction of the interior world of the other.

When I try to recall these scenes now, they come up as fragmentary and misplaced, whereupon they only hint at the grander landscape now slipping into the oblivion of memory. Often, they melt and weld themselves together, creating a patchwork and surreal landscape. One moment there is the empty train tracks covered in the rose tint of a blushing evening sunset in summer, on the other side of the tracks is a white painted barbwire fence, oxidizing over time, beyond the fence is a barren field of dried and dead grass, with billboards set up for passengers to look out. There’s a sign for a cosmetic fad another one for a dental clinic and another for a gynecologists office. Past the field of dead and dried up grass jailed by barbwire and oxidizing posts, overseen by commercial billboards which no one pays any mind—is an abandoned field of appliances: washers, dryers, refrigerators, and freezers. Just beyond the hill which hides this surreal landscape from site, one can hear the rush and call of a motorway in the evening rush hour. A few years ago, the newspapers ran an article about the graveyard of appliances and the gruesome discovery of a little boy who had curled up in a refrigerator and suffocated to death. There was no explanation as to why the child did what he did. Now, as one passes this sole rusted washing machine, the entire scene shifts away from the dimming blue twilight, to an overcast day, complete with a thick fog which has settled over like a shawl. There are little shadows systemically lining the area in rows and columns—every now and then a statue or a monument appears. It is then one realizes: this is a cemetery. In the distance, in solitary ratification, a lone man stands and turns something over on a headstone. He stops and stares—engulfed in his own thoughts of the moment, before wandering off. When one approaches the headstone, they see it was a penny flipped over to heads, and just left there casually. As if playing a game of existential mystery, you turn it to tails and move in your own direction. The fog clears gradually, and when you turn around to inspect where it has gone, you find only the autumnal forest closing up for the winter. In the peripheral is a gardener in his cottage, who patiently watches, tends, and waits for his harvest to show. He suppresses his urges to dig and uproot anything, by checking progress and admiring the rewards of hard work. He’s painfully shy and even on the border of recluse. Yet he admires his hard work, and secretly wishes to talk to his cottage neighbor, whose flowers and a glorious testament to beauty. Much like his garden, this gardener understands the importance of waiting, in order to enjoy the succulent delights of his rewards. The light darkens and dims, and the landscape shifts and bellows like ink in water. Before long you find yourself seated at night in some late night diner, where coffee is brewing, truckers are eating, and the rain is splattering the window. The light bulb above is dim and on the booth table is a cup of black coffee. The waitress is young but uninterested in her job; she’s behind the counter absent mindedly reading a magazine. Across the way in another book is a young woman studying and drinking coffee. The midnight oil is burned by all.

It was during this time I discovered the contemporary French artist: Claude Lazar. Claude Lazars paintings are most famous for depicting common place but menacingly urban landscapes. The menace comes from the lack of population and people found within these landscapes. Instead the subject is object and silence. One is then left wondering when reviewing and admiring a Claude Lazar painting: is the scene set for drama and action, or, is the space vacant and abandoned?

His paintings are detailed and realistic and always give off inclinations of the inhabitants who are only eluded to inhabiting these derelict and abandoned spaces. In one painting, we see the work room of a seamstress or costume designer. To the left is the bust mannequin bare and naked, waiting to model and be sheathed in fabric—be it velvet or silk. The desk is fit with a sewing machine, in front of a window, which overlooks the Parisian streets below. On the right are boxes of fabrics and materials, threads and spindles of string which tie the masterpiece in a web of intricate bondage. On the wall, sketches and designs of dresses are pinned. Each one is elaborate and elegant waiting to be fashioned from pencil, paper, and the imaginary; whereupon they will be stitched and sewn into reality. In another painting we are offered the perspective and glimpse of an artistic studio, fit with garret style studio windows. The place looks a bit musty and disheveled and disorganized, but who are we to judge the artistic process. Outside an open window pane, the buildings across the street are tinted in the blue twilight of an early morning. The work counter is cloaked in shadow and guarded private secrecy—no one can see the work halfway through completion, and that is if it will make completion. If one wishes to see the work of this imaginary artist at work, they need to look to the right wall—but alas the paintings are facing away, their backs turned in bashful prudence and modesty, reflecting the artist’s personality. After all, not all art must be exhibitionist in nature. Sometimes it’s the quiet and the subdued which will always win the heart, over the blatant and obnoxious clichés of nudity and shock value.

In another painting we move from the intimate and interior to the external world. A blackened sky rolls through the cityscape. The scene is set in the back alley of the city, as if we were casually observing the private nature of the backside of buildings. We observe the fire exits, zip up and down, zig and zag down the exterior of the building. The windows are dark or the curtains pulled. On top of the buildings sit old water towers lonely and sentinel. The buildings are only light up by an elusive and unknown source of light, which fends off the incoming storm, but is destined to loose. One can feel the moisture in the air, like the whimper before a wail.

In order to escape the storm we are hurried inside. We find ourselves in an unknown and unassuming kitchen. The floor is checked blue and white, the walls a neutral earthen brown. With great relief we are thankful the door was left open for us, as we find ourselves curiously observing the kitchen. The stove has a kettle on for tea, but no fire has been lit within the old wood burner. The dishes have been recently washed, as the plates sit neatly stacked next to the sink, dry but not put away. The kitchen table with its sole chair is left abandoned, with no hint of its occupant. The copper pots and pans are hanging in their rightful place; and the shelves above the sink are populated by well-organized spices and ingredients. Everything has its place, yet someone is missing. As casual intruders we carry on as the storm has blackened and cut off the outside world. In the sitting room we find a sole lamp sitting on a fireplace mantel, turned on. The curtains for the window are pulled back but there is nothing to be seen outside. The room is warm and painted in the same earthen womb like burrow of the kitchen. Next to the window sits a comfy brown (or orange) armchair. Perhaps the resident in the evening settles down for the night and reads a book by the lamp, while a small fire crackles and snarls in the fireplace. Now would be the most opportune time for a book, as the rain sloshes and smashes against the window, and any outdoor activity is now rendered unadvisable. Yet still there is no sign or inclination of the resident. The light is on, the doors are open, the home is welcoming, but in this menacing silence, the fear of trespassing and being: alone, is unbearable.

I love the detailed Claude Lazar puts into his paintings, every object is painted and depicted with accuracy and loving personal attention. The light filters through—sometimes through windows, sometimes through open doors, sometimes endless down halls. But the menace persists as one feels they are voyeuristically invading the private lives of the absent inhabitants. Yet we explore the nonetheless. Sometimes the scenes are derelict, expressing a character in the wings getting prepared to leave or runaway. A half made bed makes one wonder of a lover sneaking off in the shameful hours of the morning. A shower curtain pulled back and a dripping shower head only eludes the man who had just walked out and returns to his half made bed empty, with no trace of his lover. The beauty of Claude Lazars paintings is we are able to create and draft the narrative, imagine the lives of the people who inhabit these spaces. We imagine the modest painter who hides his work from prying eyes; we can see the seamstress with gnarled knuckles and veiny hands expertly pin and stich the material into something wonderful; her thin lips holding onto the pins with expert care, and professional habit. We can imagine a business man strip his tie and trousers and finally relax in his arm chair in the evening, free from the yoke and calling of business and commerce. We can imagine the kettle whistle and cry with attentive desire as the water is ready and it’s time for tea and everyone always visits the kitchen at that time, as it’s the hearth and heart of the home. The joy is the fact the scene is set or vacant, and we are offered the liberty to narrate and create the story.

Now older I’ve learned to find and enjoy the meditative silence of admiring landscapes. Autumnal landscapes are my favorite, how everything is closing up shop and leaving, and the fiery copper of autumn burning all around. Everything is ripened and harvested, and the fires of autumn nights cannot be compared. To admire the landscape is to look out beyond in the internal and the self-absorbed interior and to admire the external world one has the ability to interact with. No one could ask for much more, and what a pleasure and a joy it is to observe, to walk through, and to admire. If my grandmother taught me one thing: it was to find peace in those meditative moments, when you have the time.

Thank-you For Reading Gentle Reader

Take Care

And As Always

Stay Well Read

M. Mary

For more information on Claude Lazar please visit his website: 

http://www.claudelazar.com/