I wanted to hear PD James because her most recent venture as soon as I heard of it seemed to be the tampering with something that need not be tampered with. In the words of John Crace the day before, 'it is a truth universally acknowledged that a really good book does not need a sequel.' He was of course referring to Death Comes to Pemberley, the new novel by PD James, a murder mystery set in the post Pride and Prejudice world of Elizabeth Bennett and Mr Darcy. They have two sons and seem perfectly content until, shock horror, a murder. For someone who claims to be Jane Austen's number one fan, James didn't half put possibly the most anti-Austen novel into the literary circuit. I know her genre is detective fiction, and it wouldn't be much of a murder mystery without a murder, but Jane Austen barely mentioned the Napoleonic wars. The worst that happened to her characters was famously a cold. To tarnish Austen's commentaries of the twee plights of Regency females is exactly what PD James seems to do just by setting a murder at Pemberley. It is difficult to write anything negative against James, who really was a charming and incredibly witty speaker to hear. Her retelling of a story where she went to visit a prison and a murderer suggested to her that 'we should get together; you have the talent and I have the experience' got what was a very full garden marquee tittering. But, while PD James' queries; 'why did Darcy not question Mrs Young's references ? Why does Darcy change so quickly?' may be appropriate for a mind like James' who asked 'Did Humpty Dumpty fall or was he pushed?' on first reception of the nursery rhyme, it seems these are inquiries best left out of the Austen world. After all, if Darcy had checked Mrs Young's references, Miss Austen would have been left with rather a large plot hole, and while Pride and Prejudice retains a very gripping and fast paced plot, it is the relationships that Austen wrote about; people, society, behaviour, families. The plot came after and really, it didn't need any further elaboration than the happy ending it had, which gave young women everywhere (and I think probably still does) hope that they will find their very own Mr Darcy.
Despite not being fanatical about PD James' new venture, her talk was still a great insight into the world of writing in general. Maybe the most honest explanation of why she finally got around to writing notwithstanding having a family and a high pressured job was that one day she would say to her grandchildren, 'Of course, I always wanted to be a writer.' To me, this contained in one sentence one of my, and many other's greatest fears, that we are running out of time. Whether that's time to write, or just read everything that one wants to read (a sentiment also expressed the day before by John Sutherland), it was a moving statement, forcing people to be proactive. Without wanting to sound cliched, but managing to anyway, to 'seize the day' as it were...
James' general musings on literature and those who read literature were also enlightening. 'The genre chooses us' was another phrase I noted down. Speaking of the genre itself, James' talk was also interesting to someone who is a general lover of detective fiction. From an early age, Enid Blyton's Famous Five and Mystery series introduced me to the wonderful plot lines and suspense that can manage to create an 'unputdownable' book, which happens to be my favourite genre. PD James' statement that 'a book grows like a living thing' is acutely apt to any detective story, as at every page there is another suspect, another clue, another red herring. The mark of a good detective writer is one that can manage to tie even themselves so up in knots that they keep themselves guessing to the very last page.
One final thing that was apparent from PD James' talk was her self-confidence. Far from arrogance, it was a determination that she could be a successful writer, merely because she wanted to be and loved reading. Her inspirational anecdote towards the end of her speech that although she would have loved to have gone to university for the experience, she did not think it would have made her a better writer, demonstrated how accessible and universal writing can be. Quality of writing does not come from education. It comes from the experience of the author; their background, their childhood, their work, the people they meet. Even James drew much of her material from her experiences working in the forensics and criminal law department of the Home Office. While I remain cynical and actually slightly confused as to why she decided to resurrect Pride and Prejudice as a sexed-up CSI:Pemberley, James' attitude to writing, to reading and to readers was a wonderful insight into the literary mind. A truly inspirational hour.
No comments:
Post a Comment