Gaudy excess: Jun’ichirō Tanizaki, Quicksand

Jun’ichirō Tanizaki, Quicksand. Translated from the Japanese by Howard Hibbert. Vintage Classics pb 2025; first published in serial form 1928-30. 172 pp.

The title of Tanizaki’s novella Quicksand refers to the chaotic turmoil into which at least one of the characters is plunged by their passionate love affairs. It was first published in a magazine with the title in Japanese Manji, meaning the four-pronged Buddhist swastika symbol, which has nothing to do with its sinister connotations as the symbol appropriated by the Nazis; in Buddhism and other eastern religions its message is auspicious, ‘conducive to well-being’. Here it also signifies the four lovers at the centre of the (dizzily complicated) plot.

It took me a while to get to grips with this strange novella, and at first I found it bordering on tiresome. Then I started to get into what the author was up to with his literary smoke and mirrors.

It’s difficult to say much about the plot without giving too much away. Let’s just say it’s an account of the amour fou of a married middle-class Osaka woman, Sonoko (aged 23) for a beautiful fellow art class student called Mitsuko (she’s 22). They start a passionate affair, then it all gets very messy when Mitsuko’s male lover enters the picture, then Sosoko’s husband gets involved.

This heady, erotic mix is narrated in a brilliantly unstable, shifting modernist manner. The main narrative voice is that of Sosoko, supposedly addressing a well-known novelist, presumably Tanizaki himself. She breathlessly and with apparent ingenuous honesty tells him of the tangled love…what is it: quadrangle? that she’s become part of. But how reliable is her account?

Sosoko is at pains to provide the novelist, who several times steps into the narrative himself to comment on aspects of her testimony, with documentary evidence to support her version of the story: photographs, letters and so on. It’s about these items that his rather sardonic, critical comments first appear.

Of the photo of herself with Mitsoko in their matching kimonos described as early as p. 8 he wryly says they are ‘of the gaudy, colorful sort that is so much to the Osaka taste’ (if he is speaking as Tanizaki he would be snootily referring to what his urbane Tokyo sensibility would find as provincial and unsophisticated). This not only calls into question the reliability of Sosoko’s narrative, but also breaks the fourth wall and introduces a tricksy metafictional element of playfulness into things. Nothing here is at it first seems, including this author-figure’s snobbishness, which elbows aside Sosoko’s giddy outpouring of emotions, and places his own, in his view more sophisticated, sensibility centre stage.

Sosoko then is perhaps a bit too eager to provide ‘evidence’ for her far-fetched account of steamy passionate infatuations, betrayals, jealousy and partner-swapping and -sharing. Of the face in the photo of her lesbian lover he suggests ‘she was very beautiful…But whether her face was in fact suitable for the benign features of the Willow Kannon was perhaps another matter’.

This needs explaining. Sosoko has been attending a third-rate art school for women, where her painting of the Buddhist deity Kannon (often depicted holding a willow branch, with which she sprinkles compassion on her needy devotees) closely resembles the lovely face of Mitsuko. She has subconsciously used the features of her would-be lover to portray the Buddhist goddess of mercy, associated (ironically, given what we later learn about heartless, manipulative and unfaithful Mitsuko) with peace, the relief of suffering, and protection for those in peril. Mitsuko, OTOH, seems to be selfishly devoted to causing it, according to Sosoko.

A little later, p.28, she produces for her interlocutor a bundle of letters written by the two women to each other; again she’s over-keen on providing this spurious authority for her unlikely story, and this evokes another sardonic commentary from the ‘author’ framing this whole tangle of narrative perspectives: the envelopes, he writes, were

adorned with coquettish, brilliantly colored woodblock designs [decorated with images of flowers]. I was somewhat taken aback at the sight. Doubtless no Tokyo woman would choose such garish envelopes. Even for a love letter, she would prefer something plainer. If you showed her such things, you may be certain she would disdain them as hopelessly vulgar…the taste for that sort of gaudy excess is indeed typical of Osaka women.

These author’s notes hint at a destabilising critique of Sosoko’s stories: he claims to find what Sosoko says lurid, tasteless and hysterical, and possibly exaggerated or distorted. How do we know for sure that anything she says actually happened, or, if it did, how accurate is she being? She’s a very partial narrator, keen to give her own side of things as the innocent, put-upon victim of the scheming duplicity of the other three involved in this ‘fervid emotional situation’, as the author describes it with what is surely an arched eyebrow. It’s a palimpsest of stories within stories that’s been likened to Fatal Attraction and Dangerous Liaisons; I find parallels with the metafictional arch humour of Tristram Shandy.

Things end with a melodramatic twist that calls into question not only what Sosoko claims was the ending of the multiple affairs, but also everything else that she says happened beforehand that led up to the denouement. Whatever on earth is going on in all this, it’s great fun, composed with panache by a highly accomplished modernist author.

The book was a birthday gift to me earlier this month from my stepson, over in the UK on a visit from Catalonia. My thanks to him for a thoughtful and entertaining present.

Charming cruelty: The Mitford Girls, by Mary S. Lovell

Mary S. Lovell, The Mitford Girls: the biography of an extraordinary family. Abacus pb. 2002; first published 2001. 611 pp.

Why are the Mitford sisters, subject of this biography by Mary S. Lovell, so famous (and notorious)? In many ways they were just a typical example of the privileged minor provincial British aristocracy, not particularly endowed with any special qualities. Lovell doesn’t really provide clear answers: she’s too enamoured of her subject.

I don’t need to give much information here about them; there’s a good account on Wikipedia. Here’s a potted version.

David, second baron Redesdale (the irascible xenophobe Uncle Matthew in Nancy’s novels) married Sydney Bowles (not sure if she’s related to the present queen) in 1904 and had six children:

Nancy (1904-73): biographer and novelist of, among others, The Pursuit of Love (1945), Love in a Cold Climate (1949), and Don’t Tell Alfred (1960) which I described in a post here as ‘frothy and insubstantial’ (same with The Pursuit of Love); ‘snobbery and casual racism distasteful’ – especially Uncle Matthew’s loathing of all things foreign and foreigners. She was vaguely socialist.

Pamela (1907-94): didn’t do much of note. John Betjeman was in love with her, for some reason.

Thomas (1909-45): fascist sympathiser. Refused to fight the Germans in WWII; died fighting the Japanese in Burma.

Diana (1910-2003, died two years after this book was published, so the author might have been wary of upsetting her). Had an affair with the British fascist leader Oswald Mosley, and married him in 1936. Evelyn Waugh was in love with her for a time. His novel Vile Bodies is loosely based on the Mitfords’ upper-class social circle.

Unity Valkyrie (1914-48; parents were Wagner fans; she was conceived in her father’s quixotic Canadian gold-seeking venture in a town called, appropriately, Swastika): ardent fascist who adored Hitler, stalked him and became close to him. Shot herself in the head when Britain declared war on Germany in 1939, survived, but with brain damage.

Jessica (known as Decca, 1917-96): communist, lived much of her adult life in America. Also a writer.

Deborah (1920-2014): married the future duke of Devonshire and ran the enormous stately home Chatsworth House (oddly enough it’s in Derbyshire).

Unity, Diana and Jessica/Decca are the most notorious sisters for their extreme political views and allegiances. What was the nature of Unity’s relationship with her adored Hitler? Lovell concedes that she was in love with him, but concludes that there’s no evidence there was ever a ‘sexual element’. Just an infatuated girl who made a bad choice, it seems.

Diana was another frequent visitor to Nazi Germany before the war and also developed an intimate relationship with Hitler. This is Lovell’s gushing comment on all this: ‘Diana is good company, as were all the Mitfords: it can have been no hardship for Hitler to spend time with a sophisticated and beautiful woman who happened to share his taste in art and music.’ So nothing much to disapprove of there, then. Lovell even quotes, clearly thinking this is amusing, the sisters’ mother saying in ‘exasperation’: ‘Oh, why do all my daughters fall for dictators?’

There were fierce loyalties and fissures in the sisters’ relationships. Fascist Diana (and husband Mosley) was interned in Holloway Prison 1940-43 under wartime regulations after being denounced by Nancy. Diana and her politically opposed sister Decca didn’t speak for decades.

This is an entertaining account, but it’s hard to ignore the awfulness and banality of several of the Mitford sisters. Lovell’s account is full of references to their charm, beauty, wittiness and elegance, but she presents the fascist sympathies of several of the siblings and their mother with a lot of sugar coating that I found distasteful and offensive. It’s more of a hagiography than a biography.

One example of their so-called wit: Nancy was particularly noted for her sharp wit: she was known in the family at the Queen of Teases:

She seemed to know exactly what would irritate her victims most, fastening on any insecurities with devastatingly accurate effect…One friend likened her humour to the barbed hook hidden beneath a riot of colourful feathers in a fishing fly…there was often a cruel element to her teasing, which caused real distress…But despite her cruel streak, Nancy’s sheer funniness endeared her to everyone, even when they were the butt of painful tease, for she went to great lengths to make them laugh.

The usual retort of the bully: can’t you take a joke? It’s only a bit of banter. No, this is repellent and inexcusable, and Lovell should have known better than to present this tendency shared by most of the Mitford family as charmingly amusing. The same goes for their father David’s fiery temper, intolerance and racism, as I noted above in my quotation from my post on his portrayal as Uncle Matthew in Nancy’s novels.

Jessica Fellowes, niece of Julian (the Downton Abbey creator and writer of the screenplay of the film ‘Gosford Park’) has written a sequence of six mystery novels based on the Mitford family. I’d be interested to know if anyone reading this has read any of them and what they thought of them.

Rivers in the Sky

Elif Shafak, There Are Rivers in the Sky. Penguin pb, 2025; first published 2024; 483 pp.

I’m wary of novels with multiple story strands involving disparate characters and set in different periods. Turkish-British author Elif Shafak just about pulls off this structural feat in her new novel There Are Rivers in the Sky. But I still have a residual feeling that it’s the literary equivalent of those showcase buildings whose architects enjoy putting the entrails of a structure that are usually hidden out of sight, like ventilation pipes, on the outside, like at the Pompidou Centre in Paris. It just looks too mannered. Does it draw more attention to the cleverness of the architect (or author) than the beauty of the building (or novel)?

One of the ways ES keeps the different parts from detracting from the whole effect is that they are all connected and cohere thematically, symbolically and in terms of geopolitical and cultural links. Water and rivers function as a central uniting motif. She says in an appended note to the reader that her maternal grandmother, who raised her until she was 10, ‘believed that water was the fundamental principle of life’. Mesopotamia (present-day Iraq, parts of Turkey, Iran, Syria and Kuwait) is named after its position between the two rivers that flank it: the Tigris and the Euphrates. Stories of this zone, ‘once the cradle of civilisation’ cement the three storylines in the novel.

The first centres on Arthur Smyth from roughly the 1850s to the 1870s. He was born in abject poverty in the slums of Victorian London, and was a childhood prodigy with a phenomenal memory and capacity for languages. He developed into the person who teaches himself to decode the cuneiform tablets taken from the ancient library of King Ashurbanipal in Nineveh (present day Mosul in Iraq) – and in particular the earliest epic poem known to humanity: ‘The Epic of Gilgamesh’ – which prefigures many of the motifs and stories found in the (much later) Old Testament. He’s loosely based on the real-life working-class genius George Smith, the autodidact Assyriologist who dedicated his life to finding the poem’s lost tablets and decoding them.

There’s a Dickensian tone to much of this thread of the novel. Arthur’s mother gives birth to him in the stinking, sewage-polluted mud on the banks of the Thames where she scratches a living scavenging for trinkets that can be sold. His father is a drunken, boorish wastrel. Dickens himself makes an appearance when Arthur is working at the printing press where the famous author was about to transfer his business. The filth and pollution of London’s rivers and drinking water is where that river-water theme becomes prominent: cholera is endemic in the population, and one of Arthur’s family dies of it. Dr John Snow, another real-life character, is described here as discovering the source of the disease: it was not, as was thought, an air-borne ‘miasma’ vector, but in the polluted drinking water fountains used by Londoners. Bazalgette’s sewage systems were later to improve this situation, in response to the Great Stink of 1858. Water can bring death as well as life, if not treated well by humans.

This is turning into something of a lecture. And that was one of my ongoing problems with this novel: there were many times when I thought I was being dosed with the author’s obviously meticulous and wide-ranging research. That note to the reader I mentioned at the start lists the large number of scholarly texts she used as source material.

And now I’ve lost my thread. Right, the second storyline. This tells of the fate in 2014 and the years that follow of Narin, a 12-year-old Yazidi girl. The Yazidi are a group of people of mostly Kurdish descent, whose religion is based on an ancient monotheistic system also involving good and bad angels. As a consequence they were (and still are) reviled and persecuted from the start by many Muslims and Christians as devil-worshippers. Genocides of the Yazidi are graphically depicted in Narin’s storyline, and elsewhere in the novel in other periods.

Narin’s story is another of those fluvial links: she lives by the banks of the Tigris with her grandmother, and it’s there that her community is attacked, killed and the girls enslaved by fanatical Isis terrorists – with the implicit collusion of the local authorities and Muslim communities.

The third and final thread tells Zaleekah’s story in 2018. She’s (appropriately enough) a hydrologist of Iraqi (ie Mesopotamian) heritage, and her river, like Arthur’s, is the Thames, where she lives on a houseboat. There’s an unconvincing plot involving her estrangement from her husband, her bizarrely wealthy uncle and aunt and their relationship with her, and her love affair with her landlady. Her life blends with Narin’s towards the end – but only after many more academic lectures on Assyrian mythology (lamassus feature a lot – those splendid sphinx-like statues of winged bulls or lions with human heads), and on the properties of water.

There’s one particular drop of water that appears in the prologue, in which the cultured King Ashurbanipal in Nineveh shows his brutal side. It then evaporates and falls again on Arthur by the Thames, Narin by the Tigris, and, if I remember rightly, on Zaleekah at various times. It’s a much too laboured device that became, for me, intrusive, even a bit cartoonish. Not the effect ES was after in what is, by and large, a powerful and moving indictment of religious and ethnic intolerance, and a nuanced exploration of cultural appropriation (all those Assyrian artefacts in museums and, worse, in the stately homes of wealthy ‘collectors’).

A strangely uneven novel, then. Very good in parts, not so good when it descends into lecture mode. Though I did learn a great deal about Yazidi and Assyrian theogony.

More Henry James stories

Since the early days of this blog I’ve posted frequently about the fiction of one of my favourite authors: Henry James. After a long James-free pause (apart from a recent trio of posts on The Ambassadors) I returned to vol. 1 of the Everyman Collected Stories and finished the last five published there (pp. 1027-1237).

‘Patagonia’ (1888) is a story apparently written as a response to a story by Trollope: ‘The Journey to Panama’. A young woman crosses the Atlantic from America on the ship The Patagonia to marry her betrothed in England, but it soon becomes clear that what should be a happy outcome for her is anything but. The typical Jamesian narrator, a single, observing, marginal man who is clearly attracted to Grace Mavis, has to watch another man flirt with her and turn her head. Now aged 30, she realises her chances of marriage had become slim, so accepting this long absent fiancé who’s been a student for years in Paris seems her only option. Will she fall for the slick charms of this philandering fellow passenger? The outcome is left open. It’s not James at his best, but it’s another well-crafted story about class and sexual tension; Grace’s reputation suffers as the other passengers on board the ship notice what’s going on with this, as they see it, flagrant disregard of the decorum expected of young women in their relations with men. (Men can philander – is that a word? – with impunity, of course.)

The parents of 11-year-old Morgan in ‘The Pupil’ (1888) are another example of a James motif: the negligent, shabby-genteel parents who take too little care of their offspring. Flitting from one rental or hotel to another with bills unpaid, they indulge themselves and neglect their clever, observant son. A tutor is employed more as a baby-sitter than educator, but he soon realises that payment doesn’t enter into the terms of engagement. The master and pupil form a close bond – maybe too close, though there’s no impropriety suggested. When the parents’ financial situation becomes dire they even ask the tutor to take the boy off their hands. Dickens would recognise this kind of fecklessness.

 In ‘The Marriages’ (1891) we encounter another innocent, fervent young woman (Adela) caught in a web of parental intrigues and marital-romantic tangles that she thinks she ‘knows’ about (as in ‘What Maisie Knew’), but doesn’t. It’s a story where James excels at his use of the focusing technique, so we see events and characters very much from Adela’s far from impartial or percipient point of view. The irony and revelations that ensue are handled with aplomb by a writer becoming very much The Master (the title used by Colm Tóibín in his excellent fictional account of HJ).

There’s another headstrong young woman protagonist in ‘The Chaperon’ (1891). When her recently deceased father’s ‘formidable’ will is read, Rose (20) hears that there’s a clause in it, ‘if not exactly a provision, a recommendation singularly emphatic’, requiring her to live with her indomitable grandmother and aunt on the south coast of England. Instead she opts to live with her mother – another of those frivolous, selfish parents who don’t take good care of their own lives, let alone those of their children. (Btw, Edith Wharton deals with this theme in her so-so novel The Children.)

Her family and social circle are appalled by this defiant act. What follows is a reversal of roles: Rose becomes the ‘chaperon’ to her glamorous, scandalous mother, refusing social invitations that don’t include both of them, and gradually facing down the opprobrium of society. There’s that element again of the young woman who’s shunned for flouting received views of female decorum. Is Rose’s defying of convention and renunciation of her own chances of social acceptance an act of selfless heroism, or simply quixotic (a word HJ used about her in his Notebooks) and wilful. Why is she so set on protecting and supporting her profligate mother? Why such loyalty to a woman who deserted her? Is it a sort of romantic solidarity? Rebellion against the prigs who cold shoulder her? I’m not sure ultimately HJ really wants definitive answers to such questions, but he raises them provocatively.

HJ wrote a number of ghost stories, perhaps the most famous being ‘The Turn of the Screw’. ‘Sir Edmund Orme’ is an unusual example of the genre, in that the ghost in question only appears (at first, anyway) to two of the main characters. It emerges that the revenant of the title was jilted by the woman who is the mother of the protagonist’s love interest. It (he?) shows up to both of them at critical moments to check that the daughter doesn’t follow the example of her mother by rejecting this new suitor. As the narrator-protagonist says:

It was a case of retributive justice. The mother was to pay, in suffering, for the suffering she had inflicted…the daughter was to be watched so that she might be made to suffer should she do an equal wrong.

As often with these observing narrators, there’s a whiff of egotism about his response to events. The ghost, he concludes, ‘was on my side…he was watching over my interest…[and] was looking to it that my heart shouldn’t be broken.’

The story is structured as a frame narrative – one of those ‘MS found in a trove of papers’ types of story. This enables HJ to leave the veracity of the tale told in the MS open to question – something we’ve seen in several of the stories I’ve cited here.

So there we are. A mixed batch of vintage early-ish Henry James stories, each one well worth a look. Now for volume 2 of the Collected Stories.