George and Weedon Grossmith
|
July 2, 2000
BOOKEND / By JIM HOLT / http://www.nytimes.com/books/00/07/02/bookend/bookend.html
I Yield to Nobody
As
much as I liked ''Topsy-Turvy,'' Mike Leigh's movie about Gilbert and Sullivan,
I did find one thing about it unsettling. Who was that diminutive, pallid,
pince-nez-wearing and rather epicene actor in the D'Oyly Carte opera company,
the one who was shown in his dressing room tearfully jabbing his needle-scarred
forearm with a hypo full of heroin? After I noticed the other characters in the
film address this fellow first as ''Mr. Grossmith'' and then as ''George,'' the
penny dropped: Why, that must be George Grossmith -- the man who, after
chucking his career with Gilbert and Sullivan, went on to write a book that I
cherish above all others, a book that I have repeatedly rejoiced in reading, a
book that has been my prop and stay in troubled times: ''The Diary of a
Nobody.''
I am hardly alone in rating ''The Diary of
a Nobody'' a singular work of genius. From the time it was published in 1892
(with illustrations by George Grossmith's brother, Weedon), it began to collect
enthusiastic admirers. Hilaire Belloc deemed it ''one of the half-dozen
immortal achievements of our time . . . a glory for us all.'' It was a favorite
of T. S. Eliot and John Betjeman. Evelyn Waugh declared it to be ''the funniest
book in the world'' and had his character Lady Marchmain read passages from it
aloud to her family in ''Brideshead Revisited.''
''The Diary of a Nobody'' began as a series
in the English humor magazine Punch in the late 1880's. The entries were
supposedly written by one Charles Pooter, a bearded, frock-coated, middle-aged
clerk who worked in an old-fashioned City of London firm and lived in a tidy little house
in the suburb of Holloway. ''Why should I not publish my diary?'' he asks at
the outset. ''I have often seen reminiscences of people I have never even heard
of, and I fail to see -- because I do not happen to be a 'Somebody' -- why my
diary should not be interesting.'' Pooter meticulously records his little
experiments in home improvement, his encounters with impertinent tradespeople,
his anxieties over the antics of his rapscallion son, Lupin, his tender (if
occasionally strained) moments with his dear little wife, Carrie, his social
evenings at home with his bosom friends Mr. Cummings and Mr. Gowing -- all the
small triumphs and minor humiliations and homely pleasures of everyday life as
lived in a lower-middle-class household in the late Victorian era.
Pooter is rather dim. He is also priggish,
gullible and anxious about keeping up appearances. Little mishaps mar his days
(''May 30. . . . As I heard the 'bus coming, I left with a hurried kiss -- a
little too hurried, perhaps, for my upper lip came in contact with Carrie's
teeth and slightly cut it. It was quite painful for an hour afterwards.'')
Though he is unable to laugh at his own absurdity, he piques himself on his
humor and is given to laborious puns:
''May 25. Carrie brought down some of my
shirts and advised me to take them to Trillip's round the corner. She said:
'The fronts and cuffs are much frayed.' I said without a moment's hesitation:
'I'm frayed they are.' Lor! how we roared. I thought we should never stop
laughing. As I happened to be sitting next the driver going to town on the
'bus, I told him my joke about the 'frayed' shirts. I thought he would have
rolled off his seat. They laughed at the office a good bit too over it.
''May 26. Left the shirts to be repaired at
Trillip's. I said to him: 'I'm 'fraid they are frayed.' He said, without a
smile: 'They're bound to do that, sir.' Some people seem to be quite destitute
of a sense of humor.''
The quiet reproofs by which Pooter intends
to preserve his self-importance never quite come off. (When a cheeky office boy
tells him to keep his hair on, Pooter gravely informs him that ''I had had the
honor of being in the firm 20 years, to which he insolently replied that I
'looked it.' '') Such is his sense of petit-bourgeois propriety that he is
unable to acknowledge the cause of his occasional hangovers, blaming not the
dubious Champagne he thriftily favors (''Jackson Frères'' from the grocer
around the corner) but the ''unsettled weather'' or having been ''poisoned by
some lobster.''
Of the three humorous character types found
in literature -- the comic rogue, the comic butt and the solemn fool -- Pooter
comes closest to the third type, which, I would argue, is generally the most
amusing. Nothing is funnier than solemnity. But if Pooter inspires mirth in the
reader, he also elicits an equal measure of affection. He may be hedged about
by absurdity, but he is a thoroughly decent man, touching in his anxiety to do
the right thing. He is honest, loyal and kind. His diary is suffused with sweet
suburban wisdom. When his son announces what seems to be a premature engagement
to a doubtfully suitable woman, Pooter records the following:
''Carrie and I talked the matter over
during the evening, and agreed that it did not always follow that an early
engagement meant an unhappy marriage. Dear Carrie reminded me that we married
early, and, with the exception of a few trivial misunderstandings, we had never
had a really serious word. I could not help thinking (as I told her) that half
the pleasures of life were derived from the little struggles and small
privations that one had to endure at the beginning of one's married life. . . .
''Carrie said I had expressed myself
wonderfully well, and that I was quite a philosopher.''
It is little wonder that this oddly
dignified embodiment of Everyman has stamped the English language with his own
adjective: ''Pooterish.'' (This, by the way, is one of some 20 coinages that
the Oxford English Dictionary attributes to ''The Diary of a Nobody,'' along
with ''I've got the chuck!'' for being fired from one's job; ''a good
address''; and ''bread-pills'' for those little missiles sometimes launched
across the dinner table.) What is a wonderment is how George Grossmith
(1847-1912), Pooter's creator, could himself have been the highly un-Pooterish
chap depicted in ''Topsy-Turvy'' -- a drug-addicted thespian, no less. My
curiosity having been aroused by the film, I did a little digging into
Grossmith's life (courtesy of the New York Public Library's splendid performing
arts collection). I discovered that he was indeed short, pale and rather
severe-looking in his pince-nez; that according to one contemporary, he had a
''dry, odd manner''; and that according to another, he did resort to drugs to
steady his stage nerves, his arms being spotted with unsightly needle marks as
a result. Beyond that, however, there was nothing the least bit lugubrious
about him. To the contrary, he seems to have been a model of Victorian
robustness, energy and cheer. When he wasn't creating the great roles in the
Gilbert and Sullivan repertory -- the Lord Chancellor in ''Iolanthe,'' Sir
Joseph Porter in ''H.M.S. Pinafore,'' Ko-Ko in ''The Mikado'' -- he was tearing
about the British Isles with his piano in a
one-man ''Humorous and Musical Recital.'' When he performed in New York in 1892, the
critic for The New York Herald wrote: ''Two minutes after the dapper little
fellow, typically English in manner and voice, but extremely modest and
pleasing in his address, had appeared onstage, a broad smile crept over the
faces of the audience. It stayed there all evening.'' Known familiarly as Gee
Gee, he was a clubbable fellow, entertaining at his home on Dorset Square such contemporaries as
Whistler, Wilde and Marie Corelli. He loved lawn tennis, skating and fishing.
He was happily married, the father of four children, one of whom, Gee Gee Jr.,
was to become a leading London
stage figure in his own right.
Grossmith seems to have regarded ''The
Diary of a Nobody'' as something tossed off in an idle moment, never giving it
publicly so much as a mention. But whereas his greatness as a performer was
bound to fade with time, the ''Diary,'' as the foreword to the 1945 Penguin
edition put it, ''lives on in print to be read anew by generation after
generation, exactly as it was written.''
Or does it? Today, I am afraid, ''The Diary
of a Nobody'' falls into that sad category, Forgotten Masterpieces. A few
people still read it in England ,
where it has been dramatized on television and radio and has inspired many
imitators (of which ''Bridget Jones's Diary,'' by Helen Fielding, might be
counted as one of the more successful). But in the United States it is all but
unknown. Although a couple of paperback editions remain in print, I have not
seen a copy in a Manhattan
bookstore in the last decade. Few of my literary friends, even the Anglophiles
among them, profess to have heard of it. Whenever I attempt to use the word
''Pooterish'' in an article, some damned ignorant editor always takes it out.
Academic lit-crit types have shown scant interest in the ''Diary,'' despite its
wealth of what I suppose must be called ''cultural signifiers'' -- popular song
titles, references to late Victorian fads like spiritualism, clues to the
ideology of home and marriage at the dawn of suburbia.
Indeed, ''The Diary of a Nobody'' is the
first real critique of suburban life, at least as it was lived in the miles and
miles of little red-brick houses that began to swallow up the countryside
around London in the 19th century. But unlike the later literature of suburbia
-- with its tiresome emphasis on soul-numbing banality and, especially these
days, gruesome dysfunction -- Pooter's jottings manage to convey the essential
wholesomeness of suburban folkways. Despite his limited vision, he is a noble
character, precariously striving to uphold propriety in the face of a rude
world. (''I left the room with silent dignity, but caught my foot in the
mat.'') So, when it comes to choosing an existential hero, you can take Nietzsche's
Zarathustra, or Proust's Marcel, or even Roth's Zuckerman, thank you very much.
I'll plump for Pooter.
A CLASSIC--BETTER PERFORMED THAN READ--THE
FIRST OF LONDON
SOCIAL SATIRE
By Harold Wolf TOP 50 REVIEWER on July 23,
2009
Format: DVD
Mr. Charles Pooter, the diary author in
"THE DIARY OF A NOBODY", is a nobody, but he simply fails to notice.
He is content with life, almost. He presents his diary in a verbal (in this
DVD)format, speaking directly to the camera. He most enthusiastically orates
about his common middle-class social and family events (the very ones he's
written in the diary.) He feels assured the world will eventually enjoy his
written diary--when published. Is he the Suburban Snob of 1892? Certainly it's
perfected pompousness.
I can not imagine "THE DIARY OF A
NOBODY" being as funny without hearing and seeing Pooter (Hugh Bonneville)
presenting the diary in dialogue. It's strictly British humor, but at it's
Victorian finest. Bonneville's ability to project emotion and expressions is
near perfection. Hugh Bonneville can say as much with a lifted eyebrow, an eye
roll, a gesture, or a voice change, as what is provided in the script.
In Pooter's written (spoken in this DVD
version) accounts, he makes the occasional joke--usually unappreciated by
others. A time or two Pooter laughs so hard at his own merriment that he
resembles Red Skelton's famous moments of belly-laughing at his own humor.
Pooter loves his 'Home Sweet Home' which is
near the rail tracks. He had just moved into the new rental as the diary began,
April of 1891. The diary ends in May of 1892. The home is called The Laurels
(even though it has no laurels growing, but Pooter and his wife, Carrie, might
plant some). It is London ,
suburbia, Victorian, and the train traffic makes the house quake frequently.
But Pooter adjusts. The many views of the 6 or 7 rooms, as well as Pooter's
employment location, provides a complete, delightful look at London Victorian
living in a middle-class dwelling. Furnished with period pieces and accents,
right down to the tea cups and boot scrapper (which is a constant complaint).
And the Christmas holiday tops off the Victorian aesthetics. WOW!
So what does Pooter write about? Lupin, the
not-so-perfect son and his engagement with a not-so-perfect, older, fatter,
uglier, Miss Daisy Mutlar. Spouse spats. His boss, Mr. Perkupp, and Pooter's
downns and upps with Perkupp. Social engagements gone afoul or well. Costs,
especially with drinks. Stocks, encouraged by his son. Bad lobsters. Friends,
Cummings and Gowing, and their comings and goings. And that darn boot scrapper.
The DVD features explained that the term
"Pooterism" (taking oneself too seriously) evolved from this work
first published in a magazine (1888), then book in 1882 (still in print today),
this film via BBC (2007), and now this DVD. The book was written by brothers,
George & Weedon Grossmith, biography also in the bonus stuff.
Plus more, but no subtitles--BOOGER!
4 episodes totaling just shy of two hours.
In the end my wife and I had enjoyed actor, Hugh Bonneville, as Charles Pooter
so much, we finally ceased smiling and laughing. Why? It was over. Sad to see
it end.
If you like the subtlety of British comedy,
then you'll LOVE this CLASSIC British humor book brought to film/DVD. An
astonishing one man show. Listen to Pooter's words, watch him, "For he's
the jolly good fellow."
No comments:
Post a Comment