Stephen McCauley
True Enough
published 2001
I’ve been thinking a lot lately about books that
disappear, and I’m not the only one interested – SO MANY people came and added
their favourites to the list which (for brevity) I have described as ‘the
books you find on charity shop shelves’. I think the post has more comments
than any other I have ever done.
It is a generous category, but the original description
was those books that maybe were not first rate, but had unlikely success, and
then faded away.
Another topic that I consider frequently is the books that
are the opposite: the deserving titles that never get their moment, the authors
who are undervalued, who don’t get the status they should.
And in my own life/house, I am forever sorting through
my books to see if I can donate them to those very charity shops: when I moved
house a couple of years ago I gave away 3,000 books. And there’s still a lot
left…
Anyway, all these themes came together when I picked up
this book Stephen McCauley’s True Enough, an American novel from 2001.
There must have nearly been a moment for McCauley – when one of his novels
was turned into a film starring Jennifer Aniston and Paul Rudd, The Object
of my Affection. That was 1998, when Aniston was very much a hot property.
But then nothing happened. And he produces a new novel every couple of years, and
I keep thinking he’ll hit the big time, but no. He even wrote a couple of novels
about a yoga studio under a pseudonym, Rain Mitchell, and I read those too. (shoutout to Twitter mate @ernestpig - during lockdown we discovered a shared love of McCauley and The Pig introduced me to the yoga books)
He is very good at writing social occasions – when you
know the characters are going to give or attend a dinner party you sit back and
wait for joy to hit you. You will be laughing out loud.
But then there was one more feature of this book: it
dealt with lost artistes of a previous generation. The story focuses on a
singer in the end, but there is also a lot about a lost writer of the 1950s –
one of the main characters writes a biography of Lewis Westerly (who is
imaginary) and they discuss the interest of looking at lost bestsellers. So
right up my street, just what I’ve been writing about.
‘it struck me that it was a mistake to focus on the greats in history when the mediocrities on the edges tell us so much more about the culture.’
This is Jane, who is a TV producer, and to be fair she
is looking for an idea to sell rather than being wholly committed to
this, but it IS a good idea. Great American Nobodies.
I loved this description of the 1950s bestseller:
‘The psychology was laughable, the plot deplorable… no-one would accuse Westerly of being a brilliant stylist. He had a haphazard approach to sentences and an undisguised disdain for the logic of paragraphs… But he had the secret magic of a writer who could hold you to your chair and toss you into the middle of his imagined world, no matter how ludicrous or even offensive.’
This is so much how
I felt about the lost books…
Jane, who lives in Boston, links up with Desmond, a gay
visiting academic, and together they investigate a lost singer called Pauline
Anderton, while trying to sort out their messy private lives. Jane’s son Gerald
is difficult – I longed to introduce him to Matthew from Katherine Heiny’s Standard
Deviation. I feel they would be
friends (despite the books being 15 years apart).
Desmond has to miss a class or two ‘but someone who’d
been hired to teach a course called Creative Nonfiction surely ought to be able
to come up with a convincing excuse.’
Interesting details: this is 2001 and ‘a day didn’t go
by when she didn’t worry about the rapid rise in global temperatures…’ And there is a 20yo intern: ‘Within ten years
he’ll be ruling the world with his computer and media talents…’
The books are always sharp, and even snarky, but ultimately
good-hearted and not too cynical. This one asks you to look out for what you
are missing – is it in plain sight? Not the most original idea, but the way it
links up the different plotlines is very clever and charming.
And by chance I found that Stephen McCauley published a
new novel at the beginning of this year, You Only Call me When You’re in
Trouble, so I will certainly read that.
Man in white shirt Old Ralph Lauren Adverts (tumblr.com)
Hoody guy Old Ralph Lauren Adverts (tumblr.com)
Woman in white shirt Old Ralph Lauren Adverts (tumblr.com)
Woman in brown Old Ralph
Lauren Adverts: Photo (tumblr.com)
I have been reading Patrick Leigh Fermor in preparation for a trip up the Danube, and he provided a list, based on tattered, "faded by the last summers of the Hapsburg monarchy," Tauchnitz editions found in a Hungarian country house in 1934; Ouida, Mrs Belloc Lowndes, Maupassant, "Gyp," Elinor Glyn, Paul de Kock...
ReplyDeleteOh I love that book, the PLF, it has such atmosphere. And I love the list. Ouida stands out as one of the worst authors I have ever featured on the blog. Elinor Glyn, on the other hand, I rather enjoyed. Gyp and Paul de Kock are new to me, I must look them up.
DeleteAs I am the typically ignorant product of the American public education system, I've had to stop to look things up an average of 3x per page. At least I now know what machiolations are, even if I'm not quite sure how to pronounce it.
DeleteNo, no clue. Just had to look it up. He does sound nice, and it was such a great thing to do - but he did have a lot of old friends of the family and contacts along the way didn't he?
DeleteI didn't complete that thought, which was that if he was staying in peasant cottages and cheap hotels he wouldn't need to mention machiolations?
DeleteI admit, Moira, that I've not read McCauley. But I know exactly what you mean about authors who ought to get a lot more attention than they do. For instance, I wonder why E.C. Lorac (and her alter egos) went for so many years without any attention. It's only in the last six or so years that the BL reprints have gotten her a new audience. Funny how that happens...
ReplyDeleteYes Margot, and I think we have pondered this question before. One thing is for sure, it is not solely talent that decides who is celebrated and who is remembered....
Delete