Better late than never - here's my contribution to Muriel Spark reading week. It still surprises me to find how much she wrote; at least 22 novels (looking at Simon's list there are still a few I hadn't heard of before) and then there are all the short stories and not so short stories. 'Territorial Rights' was a second hand find - I don't think it's destined to be a reprint any time soon, it isn't really Spark at her very best despite anything the cover blurb says to the contrary, and this is the first thing that interests me about it.
As someone who reads a lot of 'Classics' previously neglected or otherwise I'm always curious about the process that goes into rescuing a book from obscurity, I've loved all the Spark titles that Virago have reissued, and was of course bowled over by 'The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie' (inevitably the first Spark I read) and so would be inclined to automatically buy anything I saw with her name on it because until now I've been inclined to think she couldn't put a foot wrong. In the general way of things we only get access to the best of an older authors work which in turn serves to bolster there reputation. In Sparks case the reputation is deserved, 'Territorial Rights' isn't by any means a bad book it's just not as good as some of the others.
Everything is a bit of a mystery - Robert has arrived in Venice ostensibly as a student and most likely in pursuit of a somewhat older Bulgarian defector Lena, she's in Venice to find her father's grave. Hot on his heels follows Curran an American millionaire art collector with whom Robert has been living with for the past two years. As chance would have it Robert's father (Arnold) and mistress check into the same hotel he's staying in, a situation Robert finds intolerable seemingly because he just doesn't like his father very much. Meanwhile back in Birmingham Robert's mother, Anthea, has had enough and has called in the private detectives. Their woman on the ground in Venice is Violet, an old friend of Curran's, the detectives make their money through blackmail. Add to this mix Grace (a friend of Anthea's and ex lover of Arnold's) and Leo (a vaguely Jewish young man) who follow Arnold to Venice on Anthea's behalf, and then there are Katerina and Eufemia the two sisters running the hotel.
Lena's search for her fathers grave is the catalyst that reveals the links between these people but Lena herself is not a sympathetic character. This is the second thing that hooked me into the book - Spark takes the characters I felt I should have empathised with and makes them appalling, instead she gifts her should be villains with the sympathetic traits. The anti -Semitic Lena who throws herself into a filthy canal to cleanse herself after sleeping with Leo is the prime example of this. She's made ridiculous, often cruelly so, but one cannot help but feel she deserves her punishments (mostly) and I'm curious about what Spark meant us to make of her and why specifically she makes her anti - semitic, it's such a loaded and specific way of making someone dislikeable.
Beyond that it was a quick and generally enjoyable read, a book I'm pleased to have finished, but probably one that's going to make it's way back to a charity shop. It lacks something that the other Spark's I've read have most definitely had; I'm almost certain it's a specific narrative voice - all the Spark's I've loved have been told from the point of view, and in the voice of, individuals. The characters in question might be morally ambiguous but they've generally been excellent company, I missed that insight here.
I'm sorry that this one didn't work as well as others, but at least the brilliant Spark novels seem all the more brilliant by comparison! I'm interested about your comment on the narrative voice - perhaps that is why I didn't much like Not To Disturb? But, then again, Ballad of Peckham Rye doesn't really have an individual's perspective... hmm...
ReplyDeleteI need to read more Spark, she keeps confounding me. This one showed me that the Virago reprints are all in a very similar vein, I'd rather assumed that that was Spark but now feel it's partly editorial choice. It'll be interesting to see what else she has up her sleeve.
ReplyDeleteTo be honest, I'm a tiny little bit glad that I wasn't completely wrong about this book. It's just not that brilliant but I see you were far more patient with it and enjoyed it overall more. It had something that annoyed me. I feel, she didn't know where she was going with this one. It's very rare that I question an authors intention but I did while reading this. I didn't know what she wanted to tell us, underneath all the commotion and confusion. To me it felt like someone saying something very important by using alluions nobody understands. The canal scene is just one.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you, I enjoyed it because it was short and quick and sometimes funny - essentially exactly the sort of book I was in the mood for. I wonder if it would have read better against the cold war background of the late 70's? And yes, very hard to know what she was getting at, but you do feel that there's something...
DeleteI had never heard of this until I read Caroline's and your reviews this week. It's obviously not MS at her best but as we all seem to agree, MS not at her best is certainly still a fascinating writer. Do read some more!
ReplyDeleteI'm reading my way through some of the short stories at the moment and have found some crackers.
Delete