In which I’m left wondering about the similarities (and differences) between Wodehouse and Woody Allen.
You know those ‘Art of Fiction’ interviews in the Paris Review, where they talk at length with a writer? I stumbled upon one with PG Wodehouse recently, conducted when The Master was ninety-one and a half, and still working seven days a week. I perked up at two revelations. One, when asked if he ever thought of writing anything more serious, Wodehouse replied, “No. I don’t think I’m capable of writing anything but the sort of thing I do write. I couldn’t write a serious book.” Maybe this is what made him so good at what he did, this implicit understanding of (and coming to terms with) his strengths – very unlike the usual writer. None of that straining-to-be-epic business. Nothing about wanting to stretch, given that comedy is rarely taken half as seriously as drama despite being at least twice as hard to write. As I kept reading, I kept getting reminded of Woody Allen – probably because I adore both Allen and Wodehouse; probably because I keep revisiting their work (as I write this, Alice is in my DVD player) and they’re always on the top of my mind; probably because I needed a topic for this week’s column, and the old subconscious was playing fairy godmother.
But then Allen, in so many ways, is like Wodehouse. Another dazzling comic, with a matchless way with words. (“I don’t know much about classical music. For years I thought the Goldberg Variations were something Mr. and Mrs. Goldberg tried on their wedding night.”) Another prolific writer to whom age is just a number. (He will be 80 this December. His latest film, Irrational Man, was released on July 17 this year. On August 17, he began shooting his next film, which was supposed to feature Bruce Willis – what fun! – until the actor bowed out due to a scheduling conflict.) Another artist whose middling efforts (say, You Will Meet a Tall Dark Stranger) are still worthwhile. And another creator whose view of the world is, in a sense, rather myopic. Marion Meade illuminates this last aspect rather well in her bio The Unruly Life of Woody Allen, where she describes “Woody Allen country” in a manner that brings to mind what Blandings Castle would be like if transported to New York City… “where there is no squalor or deprivation, no immigrants, virtually no blacks or Latinos in view except those wearing uniforms, and little crime that doesn’t involve property. The typical criminal is a snatcher of gold chains.”
The difference, of course, is that Allen is a more conflicted artist. I’m not talking about his personal life – though I’ll admit that no other artist (not even Polanski) has made me consider that whole “do we judge a creator simply by what he creates, or also by the kind of man he is?” question the way Allen has. But even in his films, we see this unwillingness (inability?) to settle into a comfort zone, the way Wodehouse did. Sometimes, he’ll make a farce. Sometimes, it’ll be a magical-realist fable. Sometimes, we’ll get Crimes and Misdemeanors, a stunning drama that packs into 100 minutes almost as much existential hand-wringing as Dostoevsky does in 500 pages.
But even amidst the moral murk of Crimes and Misdemeanors, there’s the sad-sack documentary filmmaker (played by Allen) quipping (after having a love letter sent back to him), “It’s probably just as well. I plagiarized most of it from James Joyce. You probably wondered why all the references to Dublin.” To fans, the phrasing of this line (along with the context) is as distinctive as Wodehouse’s – a sudden snort of laughter pierces the air. There’s a comforting familiarity in the rhythms. As with Wodehouse, you could probably reach for one work – any work – and sense all the things that makes Allen Allen. The Kugelmass Episode, a short story Allen published in 1977, is about a professor of humanities who, thanks to a mad scientist’s invention, embarks on an affair with Madame Bovary. It’s all here – the exalted literary references; the farcical setups; the Jewishness; the high concepts we would later see in The Purple Rose of Cairo and Midnight in Paris; even the psychoanalyst. But this isn’t a failing. Wodehouse orbited the world he knew best; Allen orbits his.
The other thing in the Wodehouse interview that made me sit up: his estimation of his work matches ours. (I’m assuming you’re a fan, but then who isn’t?) “I’ve just finished another novel,” he says. “I’ve got a wonderful title for it, Bachelors Anonymous. Don’t you think that’s good? Yes, everybody likes that title. Peter Schwed, my editor at Simon and Schuster, nearly always alters my titles, but he raved over that one. I think the book is so much better than my usual stuff that I don’t know how I can top it.” Later, the interviewer asks, “Of all the books you’ve written, do you have any favorites?” Wodehouse replies, “Oh, I’m very fond of a book called Quick Service and another called Sam in the Suburbs, a very old one. But I really like them all. There are very few exceptions.”
This is rather unusual in a creator, this utter lack of angst about how this or that could have been different, or how he couldn’t bear to revisit his older work because he only sees the mistakes, or (as in the case of Allen) how his “earlier, funnier movies” may have been better. When Allen faced the biggest blot on his reputation— after choosing to pursue a relationship with his partner’s adopted daughter – he came out with a bile-filled drama named Husbands and Wives. Wodehouse, though, seemed to exist in a summery idyll pretty much like the one that cloaked the corner of the world Lord Emsworth inhabited, what Christopher Hitchens once called “a lost and dreamy world of English innocence.” A few years after facing his biggest crisis – the fall from grace after making a series of wartime radio broadcasts for the Nazis – Wodehouse wrote The Mating Season, stuffed to the gills with romantic entanglements and mistaken identities and “a tall, drooping man, looking as if he had been stuffed in a hurry by an incompetent taxidermist.” It’s as if Jeeves had been let loose on the Germans and the War had never happened.
An edited version of this piece can be found here. Copyright ©2015 The Hindu. This article may not be reproduced in its entirety without permission. A link to this URL, instead, would be appreciated.
venkatesh
September 26, 2015
I love PG , well who doesn’t. There is something otherworldly and timeless about him. You can pick a PG book now and just be lost in that world.
However, the same cannot be said about Allen. Woody Allen is resolutely a Jew and a New Yorker and dare i say it, his earlier films were definitely better.
No, this has nothing to do with personal shenanigans, its simply the fact that he is now an older man and doesn’t really fire on all cylinders unlike say a George Miller or a Clint Eastwood.
Allen’s movies are an old person’s movies and it shows.
LikeLike
Sadhana
September 26, 2015
Wodehouse seems rather like Emsworth 🙂 (in his interview)
LikeLike
Kannan T G
September 26, 2015
Now you made me revisited some of Woddy’s best lines:
Only unfulfilled love can be romantic
two elderly women are at a Catskill mountain resort, and one of ’em says, “Boy, the food at this place is really terrible.” The other one says, “Yeah, I know; and such small portions.” Well, that’s essentially how I feel about life – full of loneliness, and misery, and suffering, and unhappiness, and it’s all over much too quickly.
I would never want to belong to any club that would have someone like me for a member
Annie Hall: It’s so clean out here.
Alvy Singer: That’s because they don’t throw their garbage away, they turn it into television shows. (SUITS US NOW)
I think the essence of art is to provide a kind of working through the situation for people, you know, so that you can get in touch with feelings that you didn’t know you had, really.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Anu Warrier
September 26, 2015
Great fan of Wodehouse, not so much a fan of Allen as he is now. Didn’t really have the squick factor about his personal life. But, thank you for reminding me that is time I revisited Wodehouse. It’s been some time since I’ve read him.
LikeLike
sanjana
September 26, 2015
Aunt Agatha, aunt Dahlia, Jeeves, Bertie Wooster, dangerously naughty kids.
LikeLike
Utkal
September 26, 2015
I am amazed at how inventive and so totally entertaining Allen can be even at this age with films like Midnight in Paris and how gutwrenchingly devastatingly with a film like Blue Jasmine. When you take films like Crimes and Misdeameanour also into account you have to admit Allen’s work cover a broader range than Wodehouse.
LikeLike
Madan
September 26, 2015
Never really saw a Woody Allen film properly, I think. For some reason, just never got the time and unlike in the case of say music I don’t try too hard to tie up loose ends in film appreciation. More like, whatever I happen to find on the TV screen/cinema hall and if I think it’s worth my time.
I agree completely with what you said of Wodehouse and I don’t know that anybody wouldn’t. It may be a crude comparison to make but Wodehouse is (was) kind of like one of those old, battered restaurants in Mumbai which somehow survive. There would be no point for them or Wodehouse in trying to reinvent themselves. They have a specific, distinct, iconic flavour which they deliver faithfully for their loyal patrons. Neither the patrons demand variety nor they get bored of making the same dish/writing the same book again and again. When you think of it, aside from narrow plot details, Galahad at Blandings is barely different from Summer Lightning and they are 35 years apart. Even Agatha Christie wasn’t quite so fossil-like. Doesn’t matter, we just wanna read more about Empress, one of the most hilarious characters of all times in fiction even though she doesn’t have a single line of dialogue.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Ram Murali
September 27, 2015
Wit, thy name is Woody Allen. Allen’s best drama, in my opinion, has to be “Match point.” His writing was in top gear and was matched by some brilliant acting. It was a companion piece of sorts to “crimes…”
Outside of Annie Hall, Manhattan and Hannah & her sisters, my favorite Allen movie is “small time crooks.” His scenes with Elaine May were a hoot.
Any thoughts on / fans of either of these movies?
LikeLike
Reuben
September 27, 2015
I don’t believe in afterlife, although I am bringing a change of underwear – woody Allen.
Can we actually know the universe? My God it is hard enough finding your way around China Town!
I love his quirky existential musings…
LikeLiked by 1 person
Shalini
September 27, 2015
That’s a nice coincidence. Was just watching an episode from the Jeeves and Wooster TV series with the offspring. It’s never too early to start the Wodehouse indoctrination. Allen, on the other hand will have to wait till he is 30. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
brangan
September 27, 2015
A warm, lovely, insightful note from a reader named Anjana Easwar that came via email. Sharing with permission:
Hi, Mr. Rangan!
I’m writing to say that I thoroughly enjoyed your piece on Wodehouse and Allen in the Sunday magazine.
While an Wodehouse worshipper, I’m not as well-acquainted with Woody Allen’s work, except the really mainstream fare, (which is, Vicky Christina Barcelona and Midnight in Paris). But I have watched the Purple Rose of Cairo, and I regard it the best of his works.
Reading your article was an epiphany of sorts to me; a slight chuckle at the beginning of the article had progressed to a delighted grin by the time I reached the end.
The most comforting thing about reading Wodehouse ( and now, Allen) is that nothing really disquieting can happen in the universes they’re set in, which makes them a safe investment from the perspective of a reader who is going through a mildly despondent phase in their life, and is just not ready to deal with chapter-upon-chapter of Dickens-ish dysphoria, where an endless litany of bad things keep happening to a hapless protagonist.
After reading your article, the similarities made themselves so plain. Why, couldn’t all Woody Allen central characters have been breezy Drones Club members in another era? Alvy Singer could have just been lovelorn young Bingo Little, falling in and out of love with barmaids and singers, and requiring Jeeves’ intervention to permit the hobnobbing of young hearts.
Manhattan, was, in a way, Blandings Castle, with enough romantic entanglements and secret trysts behind rhododendrons, albeit in an era, where homosexuality was as discomfiting as war was, in Wodehouse-ian times. Minus redoubtable aunts.
Since we’re on the subject of similarities, I’d say comparing Wodehouse to Allen is somewhat like comparing O’Henry with Saki.
There was a lot of overlap, but the works of Saki tended to have mordant karmic consequences and endings that would be more bitter than sweet, where O’Henry shied of overt acerbity, and was likelier to end his tales on a warm and fuzzy note.
Thanks a lot for this wonderful piece, transporting me to a wistful time where the worst thing that could happen in a book was a disconsolate Bertie breaking off another engagement or getting rid of a lurid purple cummerbund, and the wise Jeeves persuading him that both were just as well.
I felt just as uplifted as Bertie at the end.
LikeLike
brangan
September 27, 2015
Utkal: Oh, I thought Blue Jasmine was amazing, but Midnight in Paris did not do much for me. I know it’s meant to be a light piece, but there was a preciousness about it that kept putting me off.
Ram Murali: Oh Small Time Crooks is hilarious 🙂 As for the dramas, I like them all — especially the Bergman-like Interiors, September, etc.
LikeLike
Utkal
September 27, 2015
I did not think Midnight In Paris was meant to be particularly light. I thought it had wonderful ambitions which it realized with aplomb. First: to reflect on the concept of a Golden Era. The Owen wilson character romanticizes Paris with Hemingway, Picasso, Fitzgerald, Dali, Gertrude Stein and Cole Porter as his golden era, while the Marion Cotillard character imagines it to be further in HER past. The point is the golden era is now! Allen gets it across beautifully. The second achievement is giving every literature major his or her wet dream, with the witty and yet faithful recreation of the creative circle in Paris. Listening to Hemingway deliver those lines about grace under pressure itself was worth the price of the DVD.
LikeLike
tonks
September 27, 2015
A few years after facing his biggest crisis – the fall from grace after making a series of wartime radio broadcasts for the Nazis – Wodehouse wrote The Mating Season
It’s mostly established now of course, that’s its his huge naivete and innocence that was responsible for Wodehouse’s Nazi broadcast fiasco. So very believable that he did not conceive of the entire horror of the holocaust, when the worst tragedy that can happen in idyllic Wodehouse-land is the Empress of Blandings failing to win a prize in the “Fat Pigs” class at the local Shropshire Agricultural Show.
But even if writers genuinely have personal faults, like racism or misogyny, we should probably ignore that and judge them only on the basis of their works. But what do you do when the work of a writer who has given you years and years of reading pleasure in childhood, whose book was the first one to introduce you to the magic of fiction, suddenly does not look (through adult sensibilities) that appropriate a reading material, when you re-read her with your children?
And do you feel outrage on her behalf (considering she lived in a different era than ours) while reading the following link, or do you nod your head in agreement?
http://www.theguardian.com/books/2005/dec/22/booksforchildrenandteenagers.comment?CMP=share_btn_fb
LikeLiked by 1 person
Rahini David
September 28, 2015
A discussion about Plum and Allen? Wow. Without Feathers is the only Allen book I ever read and It is a wonderful book. Wittiest thing I ever came across.
As far as PGW goes, he was perfect. Never ever been a huger fan of anyone else. EVER. Too bad I don’t have that much time to write about each facet of his writing that I found diverting and why his writing is like Jeeves’ Pick me up drink.
Tonks: I had read that guardian article before and always found it pretty annoying. Especially as a woman who as a preteen played with dolls and clean, perfect make-believe kitchens, I find it annoying that Anne is considered a brainless slave(by the Lucy Mangan, not Enid Blyton) for wanting to put things away after everyone is done with their sandwitches. She plays with her brothers all the time and includes herself in all the adventures and in the swimming and games and explorations. She just takes charge of how much ginger beer or fresh water is left and at what time they should better start back home. As if that this the worst thing a girl should do.
And does George get subdued eventually? I don’t remember that happening.
LikeLiked by 2 people
brangan
September 28, 2015
Here’s a link to The Kugelmass Episode.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Anu Warrier
September 28, 2015
@tonks, I found that article quite condescending as well. And ignorant. And dare I mention, ‘horrible’? Unlike Rahini, I wasn’t really the ‘play with dolls’ type of kid – my one doll was cut up in the service of ‘science’ (which I didn’t pursue anyway in real life because the sight of blood makes me faint) – but this whole nonsense about piling on a girl just because she liked to have stuff put away is beginning to get to me. It’s the sort of reverse condemnation that I abhor.
Looking at everything through a feminist prism is fine, as long as you do not reduce everything you do not really understand to the least common denominator. Anne, as Rahini says, was a lot more than a girl who liked to cook and clean and put things away.
We seem to want everything to be ‘equal’, so today, a woman who says she wants to stay at home and look after her family is looked down upon as ‘traditional’ and ‘conservative’ (both terms, in my part of the world, only used as pejoratives). So when the rabid feminists (not the sensible ones, just the ones who see women-bashing where none exist) spout their rhetoric about choices, it appears that to them, ‘choice’ means only what they want it to mean.
Enid Blyton was many things, sure, but to take a children’s book, written in a different time, and deconstruct it through a narrowly feminist perspective? All I can tell that author is that it’s time to get a life.
LikeLiked by 3 people
tonks
September 28, 2015
She’s young and nubile, and I’m here a few pages after Leon and just before Rodolphe. By showing up during the correct chapters, I’ve got the situation knocked
He had been projected into an old textbook, Remedial Spanish, and was running for his life over a barren, rocky terrain as the word tener (“to have”)-a large and hairy irregular verb- raced after him on its spindly legs.
Hilarious read. Incidently, I found Madame Bovary was much less scandalous a book than I had expected from all I had heard, but I guess it was, taking into consideration when it was first published.
Very interesting proposition there, in ‘The Kugelmass episode’. Which fictional character inside a book would you like to spend time with? Darcy and Rhett Butler would probably top my list 😉
LikeLike
Santa
September 28, 2015
Since I can’t find the appropriate words to express my admiration of Wodehouse, I’ll simply point to what Stephen Fry has to say about the man:
http://www.pgwodehousebooks.com/fry.htm
LikeLike
sanjana
September 29, 2015
http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v07/v07p345_Hall.html
LikeLike
Utkal Mohanty
September 30, 2015
Ernest had ordered a bottle of Valpolicella Superiore, which he told the waiter to pour without waiting for the bottle to breathe. “Italian reds don’t need oxygen,” he said. “I got that bit of Bacchanalian wisdom from Fitzgerald.”
I said, “You got a lot from Fitzgerald, didn’t you? ”
“Got and gave,” Ernest said. “Met him first in Paris at the Dingo Bar. The Fitzgeralds sometimes invited us to dinner, and on one occasion two sisters, Pauline and Ginny Pfeiffer.”
“So that’s how you met Pauline? What was your take on her? ”
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/ernest-hemingway-in-love-180956617/?no-ist
This is the world Allen captures so well in ‘ Midnight in Paris’.
LikeLike
Raj Balakrishnan
September 30, 2015
Big Wodehouse fan here. Loved the goofy names and book titles in his works: Sam the Sudden, Freddie Fotheringay Phippis, Psmith, and my favourite – a law firm which goes by the name Peabody, Peabody, Peabody, Cootes, Tootes and Peabody.
LikeLike
Rahini David
September 30, 2015
Which fictional character inside a book would you like to spend time with? Darcy and Rhett Butler would probably top my list.
I never could stand Rhett Butler, though I admit Darcy isn’t all bad a choice. But thinking about it, I would choose Bertram Wooster and not just because we are talking about Wodehouse in this thread. Generous with money, generous with praise, Funny, Friendly, Eager to please, willing to admit defeat, willing to take counsel from social inferiors, I could go on and on about his positives. There is no other fictional guy I rather spend time with.
May be it is just the Honoria Glossop in me speaking. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Jagannath
October 1, 2015
Nice Post @brangan. Made me revisit Wodehouse after a long time. Taking a slight deviation from the topic, I have always wondered if ‘Crazy’ Mohan’s comic confusions where there are a multitude of characters creating chaos is inspired from Wodehouse. Especially ‘Code of the Woosters’ reminded me so much of ‘Kadhala Kadhala’ with respect to multi-character confusion.
Your thoughts?
LikeLike
PN
October 1, 2015
I really like Wodehouse, I grew up with him – and own almost all of his books – his writing has a certain rhythmic happiness to it that is unmatchable. Can’t say the same about Allen. There’s too much hand-wringing and whining, if Allen was a character in a Wodehouse book he would be Gussie Fink-Nottle 🙂 😛
LikeLike