Отрывок главным образом посвящен попыткам Ричарда Олдингтона выяснить у Лоуэлла Томаса, насколько Т.Э. Лоуренс помог ему в работе над шоу и книгой "С Лоуренсом в Аравии".
Aldington had not mentioned his TEL research to Williamson until 3 November 1950, more than a year after he had begun. According to Aldington's sources, TEL had disavowed the title "Prince of Mecca," had refused a CB and DSO, and had disposed of a Legion of Honour and Croix de Guerre by tossing them into the river, returning them to the French, or tying them around the neck of Hogarth's dog, depending on who was telling the story. The title and honors, however, appeared in TEL's Who's Who entries. Aldington particularly wanted to know whether TEL had compiled his own Who's Who entries or whether someone working for Who's Who had prepared them without TEL. On 22 January 1951, Aldington asked Williamson to act as his intermediary with Who's Who since "Now directly I approach somebody they know it is a biographer and are cagey or busy."' читать дальше
Williamson accordingly wrote to A. & C. Black, publisher of Who's Who, on 28 January: "I wonder if you would be so good as to help me in a matter concerning a friend of mine, the late 'T. E. Lawrence' of Arabia. Looking in your Who's Who of 1920, at the Lawrence entry, I wonder if Lawrence himself wrote this? I know that generally the entries are contributed by the subjects themselves — as in the case of my own entry — but could it have occurred that the 1920 T. E. Lawrence entry was supplied by someone other than himself? I would be so grateful if you would be so good as to tell me."* A. & C. Black responded on 31 January: "In reply to your letter received today we have to say that T. E. Lawrence apparently did not himself complete our form for the first entry to appear under his name, in Who's Who 1920. He did however himself amplify the entry for the 1921 edition and frequently modified it in subsequent years either on our annual proof or by personal calls at our office here."' Aldington now had evidence that TEL had edited the Who's Who entries that claimed his ostensibly repudiated honors.
A second major breakthrough was evidence that TEL had helped to create his own legend. This came from Lowell Thomas, whose 1919 filmshow and 1924 With Laurrence in Arabia had propelled TEL from obscurity to worldwide renown. Aldington had seen Thomas's statement in T.E. Lawrence by His Friends that TEL had helped with the film-show and book. On 20 July 1950, Aldington wrote to Charles Duell of Duell, Sloan & Pearce, then under contract to publish Aldington's TEL book in the United States,
If you are able to talk with the excellent Lowell Thomas, will you ask him the nearest possible or exact date of (i) his first lecture on TEL in USA, and (2) ditto in GB [Great Britain) [?] (3) Does he still have and could he lend us a copy of the sсript of his original lecture? (4) Was he responsible forthe whole film and talk, or did TEL make suggestions? (5) What was his reason for turning the attention of the USA away from the vast, murderous and decisive battles on the Russian and Franco-British fronts in France and Salonika, the Italian, to a side-show like the Arab revolt? (6) May it be hinted that the hitherto unknown author of the famous proverb about backing into the limelight was no other than Shaik Abdiil'owel ibn Thomas? '
On 16 October 1950, Thomas sent Duell a lengthy response to "one or two of Mr. Aldington's questions." He described the history of the worldfamous film-show "With Allenby in Palestine and Lawrence in Arabia," including the circumstances under which Thomas brought his show to London in 1919 and then took it on a tour of English-speaking countries, where he presented his show some three thousand times."
Aldington wrote directly to Thomas on 19 October requesting permission to publish the facts from his letter, repeating the question about the film-show sсript, and asking specifically "to what extent did Lawrence cooperate with you?" and whether Thomas had seen any of TEL's "own notes or any part of The Seven Pillars of Wisdom?"' Thomas's response of 8 December revealed more than he may have intended. Answering one of Aldington's questions, Thomas stated,
Yes, Lawrence helped me in every way that I asked — but only to that extent. He never made any suggestions unless I asked for them. He was cooperative about pictures, but no more so than all the other important figures I have dealt with down through the years. His attitude was one of rather normal indifference, combined with amusement. He had none of the irritating false modesty that you sometimes find aniong people who are lens hounds but don't want you to know it. If I asked him for something he seemed to take it for granted that I had a sound reason and let it go at that. It isn't easy to explain just what I mean. But, Lawrence's attitude was what you might call: decidedly British, and that is meant as a hundred percent compliment.
This supported Aldington's conviction that TEL's reiterated aversion to publicity was merely a pose. Thomas generously added, "It is quite all right to use anything I give you in your book. But, when you have your manuscript in final form I would appreciate it greatly if you would send me a carbon copy. If I am one tenth as important to the narrative as you suggest then I am anxious to help you get everything as near right as possible." Thomas ended his letter by asking, "By the way, how did you happen to get interested in Lawrence, and what is it that you are attempting to do?""
Aldington replied on 27 December, "I thought Charlie Duell had told you that I am under contract to him and a London publisher [Evans Brothers] to write a life of TEL." He then addressed some of Thomas's responses:
You say L. did not show you any of his notes or any part of Seven Pillars. But passages in your book (e.g. 1st par[agraph] on page 79) are almost verbatim the same as the text of L's Despatches and/or Seven Pillars, which were published long after "With Lawrence in Arabia." I assume that they came to you from the four articles published in The World's Work July-Oct 1921? Don't think I'm making a mountain out of a molehill or in any way doubting your word and TEL's. But so much has been made of these paragraphs with the implication that TE while pretending not to was actually letting you quote from his papers that I want to be able to contradict the story.'
Aldington wrote to Kershaw on 2 January 1951, "Charlie [Duell] got a very interesting long statement out of Lowell Thomas. It appears that T.E. knew all about the lecture, co-operated freely all through, jeered at scruples about fact, was often present at performances, and was enchanted by the publicity! (Why not? He hadn't realised its dangers then.) It was a film not slides, but the reels have perished in storage — what a loss." (Thomas never realized that the Imperial War Museum had carefully preserved its August 1918 copy of his original rough footage.) On 9 January, Duell conveyed Aldington's thanks to Thomas "for the material you gave me to pass on to him," quoting a paragraph from Aldington "which I think will please and amuse you":
If you and L.T. can't see I'm on his side you're a coupla pie-faced mutts.
Of course I must differ with L.T. over some of his facts and over his opinions and estimates, but I mean to justify his good faith and to prove his decisive influence in TEL's life. L.T. probably doesn't know how the British highbrow fans of TEL have high-hatted him. I am the only writer on TEL who know[s] what a good speaker L.T. is, having heard him not only on the radio often in [the] US, but throughout a most enjoyable evening at the Dutch Treat Club.'
Aldington wrote to Thomas again, nearly a year later, on 2 August 1951:
It's me again, damn me.
(1) Can you give me the exact or approximate date when you and Mr Chase arrived at Akaba in the tramp steamer? (What a journey that was!)
(2) How long were you with Lawrence in Arabia — exactly or approximately?
(3) Where did you personally go besides Akaba? I ask because T.E.L. in his note on your visit is vague. He mentions, as you do, that he was up country when you arrived, but does not say exactly how long you were there. Surely, with the prejudices of the Bedouin it would have been most dangerous to take you far inland? Or were you able to wangle it?
I know this is a bore. Please excuse on the genuine grounds of anxiety to get facts as near right as possible.
Thomas, however, did not respond. Aldington commented to Williamson on 14 September 1953, "After I had got some interesting letters from [Thomas], I wrote him point blank: Were you with Lawrence on any of the expeditions you describe? He didn't answer! Of course he wasn't."
Learning that TEL was the major source of Thomas's narrative had made Aldington wonder how much Graves and Liddell Hart's books owed to TEL, but he did not see copies of T. E. Lawrence to His Biographer Robert Graves or T. E. Lawrence to His Biographer Liddell Hart until April 1951. Aldington learned that despite the published statement in Graves's Lawrence and the Arabs that "my completed manuscript could not be submitted to [TEL] before publication," TEL "read and passed every word" of Graves's biography.' As Aldington wrote to Kershaw on i4 April, TEL "seems to have amused himself by telling Graves incompatible yarns at enormous length on innumerable occasions!" On 18 April, he added that Graves's correspondence with TEL was "very interesting" and "makes TEL to me much more attractive. When he socks RG [Robert Graves] for his damned Laura Riding [sic] highbrowism, I cheer." (The outspoken American intellectual and poet Laura Riding had been Graves's mistress.)
Aldington had read Liddell Hart's authoritative biography months earlier. He wrote to Kershaw on 29 December 1950,
Since you are in Paris will you go to Librarie Champion (Quai Malaquais) and try to get me any books on the French view of the Arab Revolt.
According to Liddell Hart, Colonel Bremond has published his account, but the shit (Hart) gives no bibliography. Garnett has no mention of Bremond even in his Index. I have never read such sloppy biographies.
There is NO attempt at critical accuracy. And no proper bibliogs. The book recommended so highly by AWL, Victoria Ocampo's 338171 TE. (may I call you 338?) is sentimental bilge of a highly inaccurate nature.
Letters from TEL to Liddell Hart reinforced Aldington's conviction that Liddell Hart's methods were shoddy, as he wrote to Kershaw on 21 April I95I:
Back here by 11, and settled down to the last slug at Hart's notes on TEL's talk plus unpub[lished] letters and many answers to LH's (mostly idiotic) questions. LH is a really tip-top Brit military historian. His idea of "checking" on the Arab doings was not to consult Turkish records and the reports of Joyce and other independent members but merely to ask TEL — whose propensity for leg pulling did not fade with age. He eventually told LH he had been "asked to take Hankey's place" — only Home Secretary! — provided the Cabinet side were divorced from the C.I.D. [Committee of Imperial Defence].
Aldington learned that TEL had contributed extensively to Liddell Hart's biography, even writing portions of it. Realizing that TEL had heavily influenced the books by Thomas, Graves, and Liddell Hart, he concluded that the "written record" was no more reliable than TEL.
Ironically enough, Aldington greeted the first inklings of another breakthrough with considerable skepticism.
Richard Aldington and Lawrence of Arabia: a cautionary tale by Fred D. Crawford, 1998, pp. 23-28.
Aldington had not mentioned his TEL research to Williamson until 3 November 1950, more than a year after he had begun. According to Aldington's sources, TEL had disavowed the title "Prince of Mecca," had refused a CB and DSO, and had disposed of a Legion of Honour and Croix de Guerre by tossing them into the river, returning them to the French, or tying them around the neck of Hogarth's dog, depending on who was telling the story. The title and honors, however, appeared in TEL's Who's Who entries. Aldington particularly wanted to know whether TEL had compiled his own Who's Who entries or whether someone working for Who's Who had prepared them without TEL. On 22 January 1951, Aldington asked Williamson to act as his intermediary with Who's Who since "Now directly I approach somebody they know it is a biographer and are cagey or busy."' читать дальше
Williamson accordingly wrote to A. & C. Black, publisher of Who's Who, on 28 January: "I wonder if you would be so good as to help me in a matter concerning a friend of mine, the late 'T. E. Lawrence' of Arabia. Looking in your Who's Who of 1920, at the Lawrence entry, I wonder if Lawrence himself wrote this? I know that generally the entries are contributed by the subjects themselves — as in the case of my own entry — but could it have occurred that the 1920 T. E. Lawrence entry was supplied by someone other than himself? I would be so grateful if you would be so good as to tell me."* A. & C. Black responded on 31 January: "In reply to your letter received today we have to say that T. E. Lawrence apparently did not himself complete our form for the first entry to appear under his name, in Who's Who 1920. He did however himself amplify the entry for the 1921 edition and frequently modified it in subsequent years either on our annual proof or by personal calls at our office here."' Aldington now had evidence that TEL had edited the Who's Who entries that claimed his ostensibly repudiated honors.
A second major breakthrough was evidence that TEL had helped to create his own legend. This came from Lowell Thomas, whose 1919 filmshow and 1924 With Laurrence in Arabia had propelled TEL from obscurity to worldwide renown. Aldington had seen Thomas's statement in T.E. Lawrence by His Friends that TEL had helped with the film-show and book. On 20 July 1950, Aldington wrote to Charles Duell of Duell, Sloan & Pearce, then under contract to publish Aldington's TEL book in the United States,
If you are able to talk with the excellent Lowell Thomas, will you ask him the nearest possible or exact date of (i) his first lecture on TEL in USA, and (2) ditto in GB [Great Britain) [?] (3) Does he still have and could he lend us a copy of the sсript of his original lecture? (4) Was he responsible forthe whole film and talk, or did TEL make suggestions? (5) What was his reason for turning the attention of the USA away from the vast, murderous and decisive battles on the Russian and Franco-British fronts in France and Salonika, the Italian, to a side-show like the Arab revolt? (6) May it be hinted that the hitherto unknown author of the famous proverb about backing into the limelight was no other than Shaik Abdiil'owel ibn Thomas? '
On 16 October 1950, Thomas sent Duell a lengthy response to "one or two of Mr. Aldington's questions." He described the history of the worldfamous film-show "With Allenby in Palestine and Lawrence in Arabia," including the circumstances under which Thomas brought his show to London in 1919 and then took it on a tour of English-speaking countries, where he presented his show some three thousand times."
Aldington wrote directly to Thomas on 19 October requesting permission to publish the facts from his letter, repeating the question about the film-show sсript, and asking specifically "to what extent did Lawrence cooperate with you?" and whether Thomas had seen any of TEL's "own notes or any part of The Seven Pillars of Wisdom?"' Thomas's response of 8 December revealed more than he may have intended. Answering one of Aldington's questions, Thomas stated,
Yes, Lawrence helped me in every way that I asked — but only to that extent. He never made any suggestions unless I asked for them. He was cooperative about pictures, but no more so than all the other important figures I have dealt with down through the years. His attitude was one of rather normal indifference, combined with amusement. He had none of the irritating false modesty that you sometimes find aniong people who are lens hounds but don't want you to know it. If I asked him for something he seemed to take it for granted that I had a sound reason and let it go at that. It isn't easy to explain just what I mean. But, Lawrence's attitude was what you might call: decidedly British, and that is meant as a hundred percent compliment.
This supported Aldington's conviction that TEL's reiterated aversion to publicity was merely a pose. Thomas generously added, "It is quite all right to use anything I give you in your book. But, when you have your manuscript in final form I would appreciate it greatly if you would send me a carbon copy. If I am one tenth as important to the narrative as you suggest then I am anxious to help you get everything as near right as possible." Thomas ended his letter by asking, "By the way, how did you happen to get interested in Lawrence, and what is it that you are attempting to do?""
Aldington replied on 27 December, "I thought Charlie Duell had told you that I am under contract to him and a London publisher [Evans Brothers] to write a life of TEL." He then addressed some of Thomas's responses:
You say L. did not show you any of his notes or any part of Seven Pillars. But passages in your book (e.g. 1st par[agraph] on page 79) are almost verbatim the same as the text of L's Despatches and/or Seven Pillars, which were published long after "With Lawrence in Arabia." I assume that they came to you from the four articles published in The World's Work July-Oct 1921? Don't think I'm making a mountain out of a molehill or in any way doubting your word and TEL's. But so much has been made of these paragraphs with the implication that TE while pretending not to was actually letting you quote from his papers that I want to be able to contradict the story.'
Aldington wrote to Kershaw on 2 January 1951, "Charlie [Duell] got a very interesting long statement out of Lowell Thomas. It appears that T.E. knew all about the lecture, co-operated freely all through, jeered at scruples about fact, was often present at performances, and was enchanted by the publicity! (Why not? He hadn't realised its dangers then.) It was a film not slides, but the reels have perished in storage — what a loss." (Thomas never realized that the Imperial War Museum had carefully preserved its August 1918 copy of his original rough footage.) On 9 January, Duell conveyed Aldington's thanks to Thomas "for the material you gave me to pass on to him," quoting a paragraph from Aldington "which I think will please and amuse you":
If you and L.T. can't see I'm on his side you're a coupla pie-faced mutts.
Of course I must differ with L.T. over some of his facts and over his opinions and estimates, but I mean to justify his good faith and to prove his decisive influence in TEL's life. L.T. probably doesn't know how the British highbrow fans of TEL have high-hatted him. I am the only writer on TEL who know[s] what a good speaker L.T. is, having heard him not only on the radio often in [the] US, but throughout a most enjoyable evening at the Dutch Treat Club.'
Aldington wrote to Thomas again, nearly a year later, on 2 August 1951:
It's me again, damn me.
(1) Can you give me the exact or approximate date when you and Mr Chase arrived at Akaba in the tramp steamer? (What a journey that was!)
(2) How long were you with Lawrence in Arabia — exactly or approximately?
(3) Where did you personally go besides Akaba? I ask because T.E.L. in his note on your visit is vague. He mentions, as you do, that he was up country when you arrived, but does not say exactly how long you were there. Surely, with the prejudices of the Bedouin it would have been most dangerous to take you far inland? Or were you able to wangle it?
I know this is a bore. Please excuse on the genuine grounds of anxiety to get facts as near right as possible.
Thomas, however, did not respond. Aldington commented to Williamson on 14 September 1953, "After I had got some interesting letters from [Thomas], I wrote him point blank: Were you with Lawrence on any of the expeditions you describe? He didn't answer! Of course he wasn't."
Learning that TEL was the major source of Thomas's narrative had made Aldington wonder how much Graves and Liddell Hart's books owed to TEL, but he did not see copies of T. E. Lawrence to His Biographer Robert Graves or T. E. Lawrence to His Biographer Liddell Hart until April 1951. Aldington learned that despite the published statement in Graves's Lawrence and the Arabs that "my completed manuscript could not be submitted to [TEL] before publication," TEL "read and passed every word" of Graves's biography.' As Aldington wrote to Kershaw on i4 April, TEL "seems to have amused himself by telling Graves incompatible yarns at enormous length on innumerable occasions!" On 18 April, he added that Graves's correspondence with TEL was "very interesting" and "makes TEL to me much more attractive. When he socks RG [Robert Graves] for his damned Laura Riding [sic] highbrowism, I cheer." (The outspoken American intellectual and poet Laura Riding had been Graves's mistress.)
Aldington had read Liddell Hart's authoritative biography months earlier. He wrote to Kershaw on 29 December 1950,
Since you are in Paris will you go to Librarie Champion (Quai Malaquais) and try to get me any books on the French view of the Arab Revolt.
According to Liddell Hart, Colonel Bremond has published his account, but the shit (Hart) gives no bibliography. Garnett has no mention of Bremond even in his Index. I have never read such sloppy biographies.
There is NO attempt at critical accuracy. And no proper bibliogs. The book recommended so highly by AWL, Victoria Ocampo's 338171 TE. (may I call you 338?) is sentimental bilge of a highly inaccurate nature.
Letters from TEL to Liddell Hart reinforced Aldington's conviction that Liddell Hart's methods were shoddy, as he wrote to Kershaw on 21 April I95I:
Back here by 11, and settled down to the last slug at Hart's notes on TEL's talk plus unpub[lished] letters and many answers to LH's (mostly idiotic) questions. LH is a really tip-top Brit military historian. His idea of "checking" on the Arab doings was not to consult Turkish records and the reports of Joyce and other independent members but merely to ask TEL — whose propensity for leg pulling did not fade with age. He eventually told LH he had been "asked to take Hankey's place" — only Home Secretary! — provided the Cabinet side were divorced from the C.I.D. [Committee of Imperial Defence].
Aldington learned that TEL had contributed extensively to Liddell Hart's biography, even writing portions of it. Realizing that TEL had heavily influenced the books by Thomas, Graves, and Liddell Hart, he concluded that the "written record" was no more reliable than TEL.
Ironically enough, Aldington greeted the first inklings of another breakthrough with considerable skepticism.
Richard Aldington and Lawrence of Arabia: a cautionary tale by Fred D. Crawford, 1998, pp. 23-28.
-
-
24.05.2013 в 21:01-
-
24.05.2013 в 21:13arabiannights.diary.ru/p71637539.htm
-
-
25.05.2013 в 01:08-
-
01.06.2013 в 17:30Shaik Abdiil'owel ibn Thomas
how did you happen to get interested in Lawrence, and what is it that you are attempting to do?
Наконец-таки чутье сработало
Why not? He hadn't realised its dangers then.
Вот именно. Да плюс рассчитывал еще прийти к победе не армией, так пиаром - и вообще всеми подручными средствами
makes TEL to me much more attractive+1, комментарии получились куда интереснее самой биографии
His idea of "checking" on the Arab doings was not to consult Turkish records and the reports of Joyce and other independent members but merely to ask TEL — whose propensity for leg pulling did not fade with age.Вот именно. И Лидделл-Гарт был в этом (и до сих пор) не одинок.
И спасибо за напоминание о ссылке, у меня во время оно ничего не скачалось (так что недавно книга была смотрена в библиотеке), а сейчас скачалось!
-
-
02.06.2013 в 01:14А в конце тут фраза Ironically enough, Aldington greeted the first inklings of another breakthrough with considerable skepticism связана с тем, что сперва Олдингтон недоверчиво отнесся к слухам о незаконнорожденности Лоуренса.
А к Олдингтону у меня море смешанных чувств: гомофобия отталкивает, стремление к точности и достоверности — привлекает. А его отношение к Лоуренсу по письмам не выглядит с самого начала предвзятым. У меня такое впечатление, что Олдингтон в конце концов перенес на Лоуренса часть неприязни к его идеализаторам, а после выхода книги, когда его выжили из Англии и почти лишили заработка, совсем обозлился и на Лоуренса, хотя Лоуренс никогда не был таким, как эти люди.
комментарии получились куда интереснее самой биографии Мне и биография кажется очень интересной, но и правда — Олдингтон там не мог написать обо всем, что знал и думал, он чуть ли не за каждую цитату бился, потому что запрещали ссылаться.
-
-
03.06.2013 в 13:40И да, идеализация сильно испортила ТЭЛ не только жизнь, но и посмертие. Могла бы, например, быть другая биография Олдингтона
не использовал ничего, что нельзя было доказать документально. Бесценный же навык!
-
-
03.06.2013 в 14:34-
-
06.06.2013 в 13:32А про гомосексуальные склонности очень утешает.