“They worship her in Indochina because she’s so dedicated to her profession. The mad queen of desperate poverty? With kids in 1906 A school counselor described her mother as a great teacher: One boarder at the Duras domicile described the mother as a strict teacher able to keep order among her unruly charges she took him to mass every Sunday. There were no lovers, especially not Chinese lovers.” Yet another lycée classmate said, “I just don’t understand this story about a Chinese lover. This incident represents one contact point between her fiction and the truth. The former student clearly recalls Duras appearing at school, flaunting a diamond ring, saying she knew a rich man. The denial invites the question: Did she ever tell the truth? She says she was ostracized for her reckless teenage affair with an older Chinese millionaire – yet one classmate remembers Marguerite as secretive and well-behaved, though she boasted mysteriously of leading a double life. One ponders the odd qualification: admitting she “only” lied to men implies she was willing to deceive half the human race. With these words, Marguerite Dur aspenned a categorical denial of any fanciful invention in her many autobiographical novels and films.
After doing a little digging to answer the eternal question – “but did it really happen?” – I think a shrink might be just the ticket. Anyway, Blakey Vermeule will lead the discussion, with Paula Moya and Stephen Seligman, who is a psychiatrist and professor from UC-San Francisco. It’s going to be a lot of fun – fans of The Lover are coming out of the woodwork and writing to me. The Book Haven wrote about the upcoming event here. We’re gearing up for the next “Another Look” event a week from tomorrow – that’s Monday, May 12, at 7:30 p.m.
0 kommentar(er)
