Saturday, June 08, 2013
The Leopard
The Leopard was Guiseppe Tomasi di Lampedusa’s only novel
and he wrote it late in life. So late,
in fact, that he had no clue it would be published 18 months after his death.
Family legend has it that he screwed up the courage to write only after seeing
his cousin, Lucio Piccolo, start out late as a poet and win a prize for his
work. Lampedusa wrote to a friend, ‘Being mathematically certain that I was no
more foolish than Lucio, I sat down at my desk and wrote a novel.’ With typical
abject humility he also said: ‘It is, I fear, rubbish.’ Lampedusa was a quiet,
inconspicuous sort of person; a nobleman living with vastly reduced status but
enough money not to have to work. ‘I am a very solitary person,’ he wrote. ‘Out
of the sixteen hours I spend awake each day, at least ten are spent in
solitude.’ From this solitude flourished his only true career as a voracious
reader. Books were his cherished treasures and his main expense, and he spent
his mornings trawling the meagre bookshops of Palermo, visiting his favourite,
Flaccovio, every day for ten years. He always carried with him a bag packed
full of volumes including one of Shakespeare, so that ‘he could console himself
with it if he should see something disagreeable’, according to his wife, Licy.
It is extraordinary – but surely also a tribute to the pedagogic power of
reading – that he should have sat down and produced something as beautiful and
strange as The Leopard on his first (and last) attempt.
The Leopard is the story of the long-drawn out decline of a
noble Sicilian family. It opens in 1861 just as Garibaldi is leaping about the
country, uniting its various factions through his military campaign. But all
this vulgar action is discreetly left to its own devices, beyond the scope of
the narrative, just as the Prince and his family withdraw to one of their
country estates to avoid any hint of real battle. Their aristocratic stature
encases them in security and tedium, almost-but-not-quite protected from the
realities of life, like the disembowelled corpse of a soldier that briefly
spoils the beauty of their rose garden. The tale is an inward-looking one, of a
family at the height of its ripeness, full of flavour and texture, rich and
resplendent and on the verge of decay. As it rots away, the story is redolent
of nostalgia for what once was, splendid melancholy for its loss, and a hint of
repulsion at what it must become.
The narrative occurs in a series of vignettes of family
life. The first introduces the reader to the Prince, who is the beating heart
of the story. The Prince is a wonderful creation, a man of overarching
uselessness who is a petty tyrant with his family and a passionate astronomer
on the quiet. Melancholy, proud and a bit petulant, he has no trouble
reconciling his conscience with visits to his mistress under cover of giving
the priest a lift into town in his carriage. His heart is only moved by his dog
and his nephew, Tancredi. The young man has been left penniless by his family
but by no means without resources; maverick, mischevious and brave, the Prince
loves him for his genuine vitality, even though he is the embodiment of the
modern spirit that will hasten the dissolution of old families like the Salina
clan.
And as soon as they get to the safety of their country
estate, Tancredi falls for the glorious Angelica, daughter of the local mayor
who has a Medusa touch. It’s a sensible choice for a man of aristocratic birth
who lacks cold, hard cash and the Prince is willing to sanction the union. At
first, though, the Prince struggles to come to terms with the sheer difference
of Mayor Don Calogero, his lack of delicacy, his upfront pursuit of money, his
awful clothes. But negotiating the marriage settlement, he shows himself to be
generous and kind and the Prince is moved by exquisite relief:
‘The nobleman rose to his feet, took a step towards the
surprised Don Calogero, raised him from his armchair, clasped him to his
breast; the Mayor’s short legs were suspended in the air. For a moment, that
room in a remote Sicilian province looked like a Japanese print of a huge,
violet iris with a hairy fly hanging from a petal.’
Did I mention that the great charm of this novel is that it
is so unexpectedly funny? The writing is wonderful; crisp, perceptive, witty,
vivid. It’s the sort of novel where characters give long, eloquent speeches
about the state of the church in Italy, and the Sicilian national character and
although you sigh on the approach into them, you find you are laughing on the
way out. There are some delightful passages, like the visit of the political
envoy, the extremely anxious Chevalley di Monterzuolo, whose ‘head had been
stuffed with the tales of brigands by which Sicilian’s love to test the nervous
resistance of new arrivals’ and who fails to make the Prince accept a seat in
the new governing council. And one chapter is filled with an evening at a ball,
the epitome of the grace, the splendour and the futility of the old regime.
But the underlying force of the sumptuous prose is entropy,
nevertheless. The novel captures the spirit and the soul of a generation on the
cusp of its dissolution. It’s a book in which not a lot happens – increasingly less
happens, in fact, as it moves through its stages – but it still happens with
immense grace and clear-sightedness, wry good-humour and ironic self-interest.
It is sad and splendid, rather like the man who wrote it.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
I am not surprised to learn that Lampedusa was a great reader. It is too bad he only has the one book, but at least that book is a good one! Those long speeches did always end up being wonderful, especially the one you describe about the Sicilian character. Poor Cehvalley was a rather easy mark for all the exaggeration that got tossed out. :)
I particularly enjoyed the long speech by Fra Pirrone that his audience mostly, overtly, sleeps through -- and he keeps talking anyway.
Heh, the Chevally part really tickled me, Stefanie, and Rohan, that's another good call. The context of that speech was a hoot, too.
The long speeches made me feel how old this book is - the fact it was written in the mid 20th century reflecting back on the mid 19th made it end up a sort of late 19th century vehicle for me, redolent of an age where people had time to make speeches and to listen to them. I can't decide whether it's a good or bad thing that times have changed!
The speeches did make the book seem older than it is, I agree. I didn't read much about the book before I started so I was surprised to learn afterward when it was published. Aren't most of the speeches made by the Prince? I suspect it is less a matter of time to make and listen to speeches than it is an example of power holding forth on an opinion and the lesser folk having to listen. But even so, times have changed in that regard too, except when it's your boss or a parent making the speech ;)
Post a Comment