#David Blaize ~ #Mapp and Lucia ~ #Ghost Stories #Memoirs ~ #Benson Family ~ #Literary Connections #Biographies ~ #other writing ~ #other novels
Claire Keane
Today's Document

pixel skylines

shark vs the universe

#extradirty

Kaledo Art
"I'm Dorothy Gale from Kansas"
noise dept.
Show & Tell
Peter Solarz

ellievsbear

Product Placement
Not today Justin

No title available

⁂
TVSTRANGERTHINGS
Monterey Bay Aquarium

if i look back, i am lost
Mike Driver
Sweet Seals For You, Always
seen from United Kingdom

seen from Malaysia

seen from Singapore
seen from Puerto Rico
seen from United States
seen from Greece

seen from United Kingdom
seen from India
seen from Türkiye
seen from South Korea

seen from Sweden
seen from Saudi Arabia

seen from United States
seen from Indonesia
seen from Canada
seen from Switzerland

seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from United Kingdom

seen from United States
@fredbensonenthusiast
#David Blaize ~ #Mapp and Lucia ~ #Ghost Stories #Memoirs ~ #Benson Family ~ #Literary Connections #Biographies ~ #other writing ~ #other novels
Frank in Greece
Now here is a rare treat, a lovely post-canon David Blaize fic from a fellow Fred Benson enthusiast. Beautiful setting, and (spoiler alert) a hopeful ending for Frank.......
Found in dear cousin Richard's archive labelled, "8th March 1896: John meeting his weird friends. Nothing has changed!"
This is such a difficult book to describe, I thought I would leave it to the publisher, whose note above says it all. The gay courage does, indeed, shine through!
E.F. Benson's lost romance (GLR)
Thank you @alovelywaytospendanevening for alerting me to another interesting article by Sasha Garwood. She is writing a book about Fred and George - here is a sneak preview of some of the sources she will be drawing on, and some of her theories so far.......caricature courtesy of resident GLR cartoonist Charles Hefling 😉
https://glreview.org/article/e-f-bensons-lost-romance/
Final Edition, EF Benson, 1940
Have you watched the TV adaptation of "The Room in the Tower"? I thought it was okay — it could have been better, but it's not often we see Benson's work get this kind of treatment!
I did watch it! I’d read the story previously, and I listened to it again afterwards to remind myself what the differences were.
I felt similarly ambivalent about it. I know Mark Gatiss is a big EF Benson fan and I assume he used his influence with the BBC to get it a prime-time slot. I think this may have been the problem. Having read/listened to a few of Fred’s stories now, they have a very distinctive quality, and I think the ghostly element is beautifully done on the page, particularly the creepy premonitions and waking dreams, but because he is often dealing with quite standard tropes, I don’t think it translates well to the screen. It was a relatively ‘straight’ adaptation which came across as bland. Some say his stories are outdated anyway, but I think a version could have been done with a bit more imagination, and less obvious imagery.
The other thing that did irritate me was the ending. Apart from the practical problems of getting a man on a stretcher upstairs via a stone spiral staircase, it seemed too neat, too clever, and jarred somewhat.
It’s funny, it seems the 1980s Mapp and Lucia adaptation genuinely revived Benson’s popularity, but then I felt they really understood the nature of his comedic writing and got lucky with the cast and creatives.
Sadly, I don’t think ‘Room in the Tower’ will do the same for his ghost stories 🙁.......what did you think of it?
In the Tube is a short story by E. F. Benson. Like so many of his stories, it was first published in Hutchinson's Magazine (December 1922).
I thought I would just give another shout-out to this rather interesting Ghost Story by Fred, available to read on the link above. It combines a lot of philosophical musings with quite a creepy little plot-line. I still can't quite believe that Fred would regularly 'hop on the tube' in London to save a cab fare, but clearly those eerie tunnels gave him some inspiration.
For extra creepiness, try Richard Crowest's excellent reading of it here.
And if that leaves you wanting more, his full list of readings is here.
““It’s a convention,” said Anthony Carling cheerfully, “and not a very convincing one. Time, indeed! There’s no such thing as Time really; it has no actual existence. Time is nothing more than an infinitesimal point in eternity, just as space is an infinitesimal point in infinity. At the most, Time is a sort of tunnel through which we are accustomed to believe that we are travelling. There’s a roar in our ears and a darkness in our eyes which makes it seem real to us. But before we came into the tunnel we existed for ever in an infinite sunlight, and after we have got through it we shall exist in an infinite sunlight again. So why should we bother ourselves about the confusion and noise and darkness which only encompass us for a moment?””
— E. F. Benson, In The Tube
“Now you’ve betrayed yourself! That shows that you are not really trying to keep the boys from immorality as such, but only from conventional immorality. And that’s what is rotten in the whole Public School system of morals. You have no true standard to go by. Not Christ, but Cricket is your pattern. It is not conventionally immoral to hate enemies of the British Empire or poison their babies with gas, so you run an O.T.C. and glory in it. It is conventionally immoral for two boys to love each other, so you beat them and expel them for it. So boys are trained to hate and made ashamed to love. Well, I’m through with it for ever!”
— Michael Scarrott [A. S. T. Fisher], Ambassador of Loss (1955)
Another incredible find by @alovelywaytospendanevening! Here is the link to this extremely obscure novel - I think Benson fans will find this an interesting read. Fred spoke with great vehemence of the 'conspiracy of silence' around this issue, and I think would greatly have appreciated the sentiment expressed here IMHO.
Up and Down, the missing memoir
Well, Fred's biographers don't think much of this novel. Brian Masters wonders why he felt the need, and couldn't understand why it even got published. He complains in particular about the detailed account of Fred's move in to Brompton Square, apparently missing the reference to his friend 'Kino', who can only be George Plank to those who know that his nickname was 'Plankino'. I challenge anyone to read that chapter without being utterly charmed by his account of the month he spent decorating and furnishing his house with Plank's help. It seems to be the essence of the domestic bliss that ultimately eluded them.
Lloyd and Palmer find the <spoiler alert> death scene of a key character distasteful in its sentimentality. Well, of course I am here to leap to Fred's defence, but these kind of comments really make me wonder if it is even possible for modern audiences to understand how present death was for Fred's generation. He'd already lost four siblings long before their time by the time he was writing this.
So, I sat down to write this with some hypotheses, and when I went to check them out, the truth was even more intriguing. Firstly, this book was published in July 1918, before the war had even ended. The chronology of it ends in April 1917. He didn't even know how the war was going to end.
Then we have Francis Yeats-Brown. He was captured by the Turkish in 1915, and was held prisoner for three years before escaping. We can't know if Fred had any inside information on his friend, but he would certainly not have been in a position to exchange letters, having no legitimate connection with him. He likely published his novel featuring Francis' namesake not even knowing if the real Francis was still alive.
I am fairly certain that 'Francis' is meant to represent a consolidation of a number of people. The only person who appears as a separate character is 'Kino'. There is the John Ellingham-Brooks connection through Capri, and I think I spot a connection with Eustace Miles too. He wrote a book called 'Keep Happy' around the same time (quite a strange book). Fred's philosophical musings seem to owe something to this, alongside the more obvious mysticism of Francis Yeats-Brown.
So, for the biographers who seem mystified at what the point of the book was, it seems to me a combination of wish-fulfillment, comfort and a very large helping of grief being processed. Grief for dead or, worse, missing, loved ones, a battle against depression, a struggle to accept increasing age and infirmity (he'd lost a kidney only 5 years before) and the slow horror of watching the country and continent he loved torn apart by war.
Is it a depressing read? Not exactly, it's Fred. He is his usual ebullient self. Is there a bittersweet poignancy running through this book? Well, for me, yes. Much of the subject matter is dark, and somehow Fred's insistence on looking for joy and redemption at every turn makes it even sadder.
I think it may be significant that this book was written 2 years after David Blaize, which marked a shift towards more personal writing, and 2 years before his first memoir, 'Our Family Affairs'. If you're looking for some real insights into this state of mind though, this is the book. The references couldn't be more thinly disguised if you know a little about about Fred's life.
George Plank and the Ballet Russes
Well, he's an elusive fellow, but I think this is a rare photograph of George Plank (bottom right, seated) with the Ballet Russes in Seville, in May 1916.
There is strong circumstantial evidence - he was closely associated with Sergei Diaghilev's touring company at this time as a designer, and although there is no record of him being with them on this tour, there is no reason why he couldn't have tagged along. The features are a very good match, and the clothes suggest someone artistic and fashionable. But most of all, it's the expression. I'm not sure it will ever be possible to verify this, (most of the people in the picture remain unknown), but I'm confident this strangely nervous-looking young man is him.
<Thanks to the OH for unearthing the group picture and suggesting the connection>
Fred's poetry....
I just wanted to showcase these two poems from Fred - which came to light through this article from Sasha Garwood - thank you @alovelywaytospendanevening for sharing these.
I'm not an expert on poetry but I found them both revealing and interesting from a literary point of view.
Douglas Tilden (American, 1860-1935). "The Football Players", c.1900. University of California, Berkeley, CA. cast bronze
Lucia and Georgie's sexless marriage
As we have been speculating recently on Fred's romance with George Plank I thought I would share some thoughts about Lucia and Georgie in Mapp and Lucia.
I am slightly surprised that Georgie is so often cited as the 'authorial insert' character, when, for me, it is Lucia who is most like Fred.
Geraldine McEwan and Nigel Hawthorne in 'Mapp and Lucia', Channel 4, 1985
And there are one or two nods to George Plank in the character of Georgie Pillson, whose predecessor 'Aunt Georgie' was illustrated by Plank in 'The Freaks of Mayfair'. There are the first name and initials, for a start. Georgie is an artist and embroidery fanatic devoted to beautiful things. But the smoking gun must surely be the endearment 'Georgino', an echo of Fred's pet name for George Plank, 'Plankino'.
But what are we to make of it? Perhaps there is a little revenge in poking gentle fun at Georgie's vanity and lack of assertiveness. But then again, what really stays with me from the series is their unshakeable loyalty to one another, and the delightful trivialities of their domestic existence together which is so well established that getting married is something of an afterthought to both. If, as Sasha Garwood suggests in her article, it is really the love and affection that he wants to portray, this seems to me to do the job nicely.
As for their mutual insistence that there be no 'connubialities', is it just an in-joke about Fred's confirmed bachelor status, or a comic reversal? Or something more? Whatever it is, I can't help finding it very funny and very sweet, and in the end, perhaps that it is the most important thing.
Here they are then, suddenly realising that the prospect of matrimony 'had lost it's horror':
It was with a sense of restored well-being that they sank into their chairs, too content in this relief from strain to play duets. Georgie was sewing a border of lace on to some new doilies for finger-bowls, and Lucia found the "Characters of Theophrastus," and read to him in the English version the sketch of Benjy's prototype. As their content worked inside them both, like tranquil yeast, they both became aware that a moment of vital import to them, and hardly less so to Tilling, was ticking its way nearer. A couple of years ago only, each had shuddered at the notion that the other might be thinking of matrimony, but now the prospect of it had lost its horror.
Georgie put down his work, for all his fingers were damp, and one was bloody. He remembered that he was a man. Twice he opened his mouth to speak, and twice he closed it again. He looked up at her, and caught her eye, and that gimlet-like quality in it seemed not only to pierce but to encourage. It bored into him for his good and for his eventual comfort. For the third time, and now successfully, he opened his mouth. "Lucia, I've got something I must say, and I hope you won't mind. Has it ever occurred to you that — well — that we might marry?" She fiddled for a moment with the cricket bat and the football, but when she raised her eyes again, there was no doubt about the encouragement. "Yes, Georgie: unwomanly as it may sound," she said, "it has. I really believe it might be an excellent thing. But there's a great deal for us to think over first, and then talk over together. So let us say no more for the present.
Lucia fixed her eyes on a corner of the ceiling, as if in a music-face, but her knotted brow showed it was not that. "I thought of writing to you about the first point, which is the most important of all," she said, "but I found I couldn't. How can I put it best? It's this, Georgie. I trust that you'll be very comfortable in the oak bedroom." "I'm sure I shall," interrupted Georgie eagerly. " — and all that implies," Lucia went on firmly. "No caresses of any sort: none of those dreadful little dabs and pecks Elizabeth and Benjy used to make at each other."
Selection of 1910s–20s George Wolfe Plank's covers for Vogue.
TLS: E. F. Benson’s tortured sexuality
Author E. F. Benson (Fred to his intimates) has often been characterized as uninterested in, or even repelled by, physical intimacy. His biographer Brian Masters described him as “a prude” who “was wary of sex, distrusted it, feared it, and probably in the end avoided it”. The historian Steven Runciman, who met Benson in the late 1920s, declared: “I don’t think that passion, either physical or emotional, played a part in his life”, on the grounds that he considered himself “a personable youth whom a lecherous homosexual might have desired”, and that Benson “never touched him, except to shake hands”. Recent critics are more sanguine, often quoting Benson’s description of Capri “fellows” with their “attractive pagan gaiety”, and inferring a comfort with “casual same-sex activity” from the suggestion that “Pleasure sanctified all they did”. The implication is that Benson perhaps indulged himself in Capri, where he shared a villa with the homosexual classicist John Ellingham Brooks, but was too canny and respectable to combine sex with romantic love at home in English high society.
If he did, he certainly didn’t want us to know about it. Benson shaped the family archives on the principle that “‘when in doubt burn’ was the safer course”. Despite the vast, fascinating cache of his papers in the Bodleian Library, there is a lot we’ll never find. And as Simon Goldhill notes in A Very Queer Family Indeed (2016), “He tells nothing … There is barely a word in any of his surviving papers on any aspect of his internal erotic life”.
Nevertheless, in folders acquired by the Bodleian from Mrs Alice Russell in 1991, there is poetry that tells us more about Benson’s internal erotic life than anything else yet discovered. There is little clue as to when he wrote them; they are scrappy, much-edited drafts on torn paper, originally found in an envelope marked “Literary fragments”. But with their kisses, shared beds and passionate silences, they evoke an intensely romantic, ardently desiring man with the capacity for profound emotional attachment to people with whom he was sexually involved.
"Last night at the dead hour before the day When birds announce the dawn and sleep again And to the sleepless heart and sleepless brain The lights are low and all sweet things decay I told the bitter beads of love and pain Each after each in fruitless rosary And every bead had bitter words to say You stirred beside me and your sundered arm While yet I feigned to sleep slipped round my breast And over mine your knee was softly bent Then mute you slipped from my side, but golden balm You spread about your going, for you pressed Your lips to mine in silence, as you went."
Masters quoted a couple of these lines in his biography (1991), in rather different form, but the whole almost-sonnet has never been published or explored in any detail. It is addressed to someone with whom the speaker is physically entangled and sharing a bed. That final kiss is both reified and undercut by the lover’s mute exit and the speaker’s inability to articulate either consciousness or passion.
The same is true of another poem in the same folder, which also substitutes silent, joyful sexual contact for verbal declarations:
"I saw your soul stir in its sexless sleep and wondered what red blossom would be born with what awakening you would hail the morn and when you would fare forth love’s tryst to keep Whether your wide sad eyes [would] wake to weep in dim & deep perplexity forlorn or laugh to see the golden sheaves of corn Stand ready for your harvest rich & deep Thus opened on the world your soul’s sweet eyes Bright as with morning dew on the eglantine But never had I once expected this That in your face danced rapturous surprise And sweetly shyly do your lips seek mine And meet there in the wonder of your kiss."
This has never been studied, and is much more scribbled-over than the other. Romance and physical intimacy again intertwine. The pastoral cast, and the emphasis on what Benson’s brother Arthur, discussing the “homo sexual question” with him, called the “concurrence of souls”, make it clear that the “wonder of your kiss” is both physical and emotional.
Both poems contradict the idea of Benson as repelled by physical contact or uninterested in combining sexual and emotional intimacy. But they also reflect the complexity with which love between men is represented elsewhere in his oeuvre. The “sexless sleep” of the second poem perhaps resonates with the sexlessness of boyhood posited to explain romantic friendships in Our Family Affairs (1920) and Mother (1925). It’s noticeable, though, that his representations of close relationships between men are between peers or coevals – boys at school in David Blaize (1916), young men at university in David of King’s (1924) or The Babe, B. A. (1897), adult men in Up and Down (1918) or some of the ghost stories.
David Blaize is particularly interesting here because it articulates the conflict between romantic love and sexuality that some critics have suggested Benson carried into his adult relationships. A schoolboy romance, written during the first years of his friendship with George Wolfe Plank and combining their names in that of its sexually fallen love interest, its plot hinges on Frank Maddox’s willingness to sacrifice desire so that he and David can share “boy-love, hot as fire and as clean as the trickle of ice-water on a glacier”. The published novel is oblique: Frank looks at a towel-clad David in a way that makes him uncomfortable, David flees, and a remorseful Frank gazes at himself in the mirror and concludes: “You beast. You ought to be shot”. But the first draft is more explicit, featuring a naked clinch in a corridor and pages of Frank’s conflicted interiority about “pleasure and longing”. In Benson’s usually telegraphic and quotidian Marlborough diary, several pages are ripped out due to “a dreadful period of temptation with its bearing on my friendship with Risley”. Benson once told a researcher that David Blaize had “a lot of autobiographical stuff boiled in”; one doesn’t have to go far to find it.
Benson’s last word on the subject comes in his memoir, Final Edition (1940), finished ten days before his death. There, criticizing explicit representations of sex in current fiction, he argues that “sexual desire is as natural a craving as hunger or thirst”, and writes: “the most unsatisfactory feature in these coitions was that the partners in them seemed to care for the act so much more than they cared for each other … I felt really sorry for these bloodless voluptuaries who got so little fun out of their amusements”.
Perhaps it is disingenuous, given his earlier denunciations, to suggest that the problem for Benson had never been sex itself, but sex between people who didn’t care for one another. But he was an establishment figure, and this was 1940, almost thirty years before the (partial) decriminalization of homosexuality and barely forty after the trials of Oscar Wilde. The insistence on care between lovers may have been Fred’s way of recognizing in print what he encoded in those unpublished poems: that not only did he feel love and sexual attraction, but in combination, they had been transcendent.
(Full article)