Faulks on Fiction

The BBC currently seem to be having a literature season, and they’ve given some slots to Sebastian Faulks to pontificate on the novel. (And some other people too).

Faulks’ first approach has been to discuss the novel in terms of its heroes through history.

By history, of course, Faulks means English history (no, not even the history of the English-speaking peoples – just English history). The significant heroes in the history of the novel so far have been: Robinson Crusoe, Tom Jones, Becky Sharp, Sherlock Holmes, Winston Smith, Lucky Jim, and John Self.

Faulks demonstrates how, in portraying their heroes, the authors of these novels were the “first” to do something – since, as we all know, being the “first” to do something is the most significant thing about novels and is in fact why we read them. So:

  • Defoe was the first to have a hero who was an ordinary individual (this is connected to the Enlightenment’s alleged “greater interest” in the individual)
  • Fielding was the first to have a hero who wasn’t wholly morally upright
  • Thackeray was the first to have a hero who was a heroine, and whose ambition while perhaps not moral we still somehow admire
  • Conan Doyle was the first to create a superhero
  • Orwell was the first to portray totalitarianism and to have a hero who loses
  • Amis Snr was the first person to make us laugh, possibly since the first world war
  • Amis Jnr was the first to have a hero we don’t actually like much

OK, perhaps this is a slight caricature of his views – but it isn’t far different, I assure you.

The significance of literature is naturally connected to a more general politcal history and to a history of ideas, which modus operandi leads Faulks to make some incredibly unlikely claims, such as:

  • After the first world war, people didn’t believe in heroes any more and so didn’t write books about them
  • After the second world war, people lived in a state of austere depression, until Kingsley Amis came along and had the insight to crack a joke or two.

If this masterclass in cherry-picking isn’t to your taste though, there’s also a second programme, The Birth of the British Novel, with Henry Hitchings (?!!), which at least mentioned Laurence Sterne – although then, to my chagrin, then interviewed Tom McCarthy in order to establish his importance (only the avant-garde can truly appreciate the avant-garde). – One thing left Obooki perplexed however: in The Birth of the British Novel, in order to beef up Sterne’s risqué outsider credentials (such as all good writers need), they claimed that the Church was shocked by the publication of Tristram Shandy; whereas in the book “Enlightenment” which I’m currently reading, which wishes to demonstrate that England was a thoroughly enlightened and consequently largely irreligious country, seemingly no one was the slightest bit surprised Tristram Shandy had been written by a clergyman, least of all the Church – after all, the English clergy were well-known throughout Europe as a bunch of faithless infidels. – It’s funny how different things can seem when you’re determined to prove something.

6 thoughts on “Faulks on Fiction

  1. After immediately claiming that the British do words better than pictures Faulks then went and blew the budget on travelling to a desert island in order to make the job of “explaining” Robinson Crusoe easier for us.

    Evidently the director didn’t entirely agree with this dubious and oft trumpeted claim or was trying to prove that the British are no good at words or pictures or after a cold winter everyone involved wanted a good holiday.

    Using TV adaptations of the books didn’t help much either.

  2. If that’s what he believed, surely his series would have been better on the radio?

    Still, we’ll see what the next episode is like: – the history of literature as told through the idea of love. – Jane Austen, I guess / no Dickens (just as the last episode) / Lawrence will have to be in there / George Eliot? / the Brontes / Forster perhaps / Thomas Hardy / and then someone modern and cynical / pessimistic, ah perhaps Ian McEwan (Enduring Love / On Chesil Beach). – Yes, that all sounds likely. [Looking at the preview text, I got Austen right, but it will be Alan Hollinghurst, not McEwan. Wasn’t he the first person to write a story about homosexual love?]

  3. You’ll have to face Faulks alone I’m afraid – one episode was enough for me. Good luck. I’m going to make up my own history – Will Self being the first person to write about taking drugs in a cupboard, BS Johnson the first person to use the surname Malry in a book title. Important stuff.

    My significant other was very taken with Faulks’ novel Engleby but she also found his guide to novels extremely irritating for a number of reasons, one of which was the overbearing soundtrack.

  4. I don’t know, I found it watchable enough in its way. – I tried reading The Girl at the Lion Door once, but gave up because it seemed to be just 250 pages of boring, trivial detail.

  5. I saw about 5min of the first programme, and the only thing that struck me was that he was wearing the same loud but well-ironed pink shirt in each location. I mean, it was crisp, immaculate – he obviously didn’t sit down at all during filming.

  6. Yes, I hadn’t noticed the pink shirt – just watched the first 10 minutes of the 2nd episode (which I’d missed earlier) and he’s still wearing it. – Perhaps they filmed Faulks in a studio one day and have merely superimposed him on different backgrounds.

    Jane Austen was the first writer to have a romantic lead who was a depressive. – All of literary history dealing with love prior to the novel can be dismissed because it wasn’t realistic. This is why we can’t identify in any way with Romeo and Juliet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s