Skip to main content

Et in Arcardia Ego


Again, I have come to affirm that the history of one's reading life is the history of discovery, like little explosions that detonate, like pop rocks in the mouth, sparking ideas and sensations and connections; an individualized map where all the world is dark, but little red lights glint on different coasts and a something spidery journeys from point to point to form a road.

Last Friday night I turned on NPR as I drove home, my illicit late-night entertainment, and it seemed like an interview about gardening. But then I thought it too formalized to be an interview: the recording was too clean and there was too much vocal inflection. So it must be a radio play about horticulture. There was something about geometry and sentimentality and game books and Capability Brown - and by the time I heard the name Lord Byron, I was hooked. I contemplated sitting in my car outside the house to catch the author's name, but ran inside to sit by the radio until midnight instead.

The play was Arcadia by Tom Stoppard. Regrettably, midnight brought the end of Act I and, as in oldentimes, I am forced to wait until next Friday night for Act II. I couldn't wait that long - I bought the play at the bookstore (with credit) and read it speedily. It does not, however, lend itself to speedy reading and I'll have to re-read it at some point.

The play concerns two academics - Bernard, a literary don, and Hannah, a garden historian - investigating their research subjects at an English country estate, Sidley Park. The play alternates between early nineteenth century Britain and the present day as the academics and the modern-day inhabitants of Sidley Park try to establish what really happened with the original Sidley Park crew (wandering wives, philandering poets, enraged husbands; a tutor and his young pupil, she aflame with mathematical theories). What seems at first like a historical drama becomes a literary mystery, which becomes less about Byron and more about physics and science and chaos theory, which becomes more about sex, and so on. It is like Gosford Park and Possession and a science lab rolled into one. The dialogue is witty, vivid and sharp - one must pay attention to keep up. It is amusing and ironic, detached and subtly heartfelt - the perfect tension between the Classical and Romantic eras.

The name "Tom Stoppard" sounded familiar, so I shouldn't have been surprised to see that he is best known for his play Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead, something I've been meaning to read - in fact have had the first few pages acted out for me by friends while I cleaned my room.

So I've gone to the Seattle Public Library and put nearly every Tom Stoppard play on hold, eagerly awaiting for the next one.

The road goes on. New discoveries, new dots on the map. Now I know Tom Stoppard. Now I am reading a biography of Byron and Shelley, which - so far - I must say - is very good.

Comments

Ian Wolcott said…
That first paragraph of yours is very nice, by the way.

Popular posts from this blog

Tracing my steps

Has it really been eight years since I last wrote here? It was picking up Murdoch’s The Book and the Brotherhood that reminded me. My reading diary said I read the novel in 2011, but I don’t believe it. I have no memory of it. (And you would.) I came back to this blog to cross-reference. Yes, I can see I bought it in December 2010 – for a steal – but wrote nothing on it.  An old blog, like an old diary, is a shed skin, preserved by sentimentality, laziness, and neglect. For a while I was appalled at how openly I exposed my ignorance! I thought it was charming. (An Americanism?) Also for trying to speak in a register I couldn’t consistently command. But now that blogging is a dead art, that the energy that once lived there has been translated into Tiktok, or Youtube, or Substack, the blog becomes practically private. I can come back and paw over this old, shed skin.  When you come across old writing, there’s an inevitable measuring up between the self you were then and the sel...

Natural Love

We sadly miss the beauty and silliness of medieval cosmology: “The sun, moon, and stars go still round…for love of perfection. This love is manifest, I say, in inanimate creatures. How comes a loadstone to drawn iron to it? jet chaff? The ground to covet showers, but for love? No creature, St. Hierome concludes, is to be found…[that does not love something], no stock, no stone, that hath not some feeling of love. ‘Tis more eminent in plants, herbs, and is especially observed in vegetals…the olive and the myrtle embrace each other in roots and branches if they grow near…” Robert Burton, Anatomy of Melancholy .

The School of Hard Knocks

It is my current hope to go to graduate school for English literature next year: a certain school in a certain place, both a goal and an insurmountable challenge. Having been out of college for a year already, and having graduated as a music major, I am rusty. Trying to compensate, I googled “books every english major has read” but have had a difficult time finding a list that suggests what every (generalized) English major should have read by the time of (undergraduate) graduation. As a person who attended a high school whose meager syllabus prescribed the study of one novel, one play and four poems a year, and who could only scrape enough college literature credits for a minor, I feel woefully behind. Most American kids got a head start in AP English (seriously – who are those freaks who read Ulysses in high school?). American high schools may have their weaknesses, but a strong and ambitious push to read literature consistently is not one of them. There are gaps, and I fear that wh...