Letter from David Cornwell (John le Carré)

cornwell, 2012-02-13 by halobrien
cornwell, 2012-02-13, a photo by halobrien on Flickr.

Here’s what I sent him:

*^*^*^*

22 January 2012

David Cornwell, aka John le Carré
℅ {his UK publisher}

Dear Mr. Cornwell:

I have received your kind reply of 4 Feb 2011, for which I thank you. “That mysterious Jerusalem above-the-ground,” indeed. I am sorry for the delay in responding — I had an injury last year which made me tardy on many fronts.

Unlike the speculation of my previous letter, I’d like this time to convey my unabashed appreciation of an aspect of your work I don’t feel gets enough recognition — the recordings you make reading your stories.

The first time I heard you was in Los Angeles, sometime in the early 1990s. A local radio station was playing what was obviously a dramatization, and it took a while for me to realize all the characters and the narrator were being read by solely one person — despite gender, class, nationality, or accent. I became intensely curious as to who was doing this extraordinary performance. I thought it likely it was some West End stage actor of whom I’d never heard, but was more than willing to look up other performances, and get them. Imagine my astonishment when the local radio announcer came on to say, “That was The Russia House by John le Carré, read to you by the author…”

I’ve been lucky enough to know a few writers. Not one comes close to your skill. Which seems a missed opportunity, to me. Here I will speculate: I imagine your characters’ voices are so clear to you that I would think you inhabit their world in a way few writers do.

Since that day, I always hunt down your recordings as each book comes out. I know I’ll hear something of a stock cast, but then, I see it much like a radio company. The Major; the working-class fellow who tends to sound like Sid James to my ear; the more threatening than they might seem senior analyst (I’m thinking of Walter in The Russia House). I would joke to my friends that, since you knew you were going to be doing the recording, you deliberately put a character early in a novel to be a challenge: Madame Sophie, the francophone Egyptian woman in The Night Manager is the example I would cite to them. And damned if you didn’t get the voice right, challenge or not. I tell people to get the DVD set for the 1979 Tinker, Tailor if only to see you drop down into your uncanny rendition of Alec Guinness.

At which point it all comes down to A Perfect Spy, doesn’t it? “Magnus and his voices,” and entertaining Rick’s — or should I say Ronnie’s? — court.

I have no idea why you didn’t become an actor, Mr. Cornwell. But I’m glad to have been able to see these flashes of performance from you. Thank you.

Hoping this finds you well,

Hal O’Brien

*^*^*^*

His reply reads:

Dear Hal O’Brien,

Thanks so much for that. I’m glad you enjoy my readings, + I enjoy doing them. I’ve always loved ‘voicing’ my characters, as the film people say: actually, voices are characters, + vice versa. And we Brits are branded on the tongue, as we say. I have no music, so far as I know, but since infancy, I’ve had the ear for voices, + continue to thrill to them. Thanks again for writing –

Best
David Cornwell

The Linz Café

I recently read Adam Gopnik’s The Table Comes First, which has had the odd consequence of prompting me to think a bit about what it doesn’t discuss. More about that later, but I wanted to get this quote down for a co-worker. It’s from Christopher Alexander’s The Linz Café:

“(I)n order to get each detail to work just right… it was of course necessary to work each detail out, very exactly, by trial and error, using full scale mock-ups to get size and proportion just exactly right. For example, in the case of the alcoves, I spent several hours in the office, playing with chairs, tables, and pieces of plywood, until I had the dimensions of the alcove exactly right. I knew I had it right when it felt so comfortable, that everyone in the office clustered around, sat in the simulated alcove drinking brandy, and refused to leave.”

Mostly, Gopnik writes about food and how it influences our lives. I liked the book, nay, I almost wore out my Nook’s highlighting function on the thing with passages and aphorisms that Gopnik turns out seemingly effortlessly.

But it’s more the feeling of being in Alexander’s alcove, drinking brandy and being in a group, that I was looking for. I’m calling it “conviviality,” since it’s a fine old word.

I wanted to be sure to write this now, just on the 2nd of the year, because I want to see if this can be what I write about the most during 2012. And is there a better place to start than Alexander’s mix of empiricism and optimism in Linz? I think not.

Theater

Just as there’s a difference between security and security theater (one helps you be safe, the other allows you to feel safe while adding nothing to your safety) there is a difference between quality and quality theater. Between innovation and innovation theater. Between design and design theater. Even between (dare I say it) taste and taste theater.

Some companies are very theatrical.

Devious indeed

Reed Hastings at Netflix has announced the company is splitting into two separate entities: The DVD business is becoming Qwikster, while the streaming business is retaining the name Netflix.

As many have already commented, this is a strategic decision, yes. But not in the way some seem to think. It separates out the business likely to be viable because the legalities are well known (Qwikster) from the business likely to fail because the studios are about to poke it in the eye and refuse to license to it (Netflix). See the collapse of talks with Starz, the Sony issue earlier this year, etc. In fact, it shields one business (Qwikster) from possible litigation by the studios against the business likely to die smothered in a dogpile of lawsuits (Netflix).

I’m guessing you’re about to reply that the studios would never be that stupid. My rejoinder would be a hollow laugh, and a suggestion you look at a century of business history when it comes to the ineptitude of the studios.

Is it his inner Gary Hart? Or his inner Baldrick?

Quoth MG Siegler of TechCrunch:

“The conflicts we need to worry about are the ones not disclosed. They’re far more prevalent and they do actually deceive readers because they’re far more subtle.”

As far as I can tell, Mr. Siegler is really saying, “We’re deceiving you so subtly, you’ll never catch us. No, never. Just you try. ‘Follow me around. I don’t care. I’m serious. If anybody wants to put a tail on me, go ahead. They’ll be very bored.’”

Or, possibly… “My lord, I have a cunning plan.”

“Baldrick, you wouldn’t recognize a cunning plan if it painted itself purple and danced naked on top of a harpsichord singing ‘Cunning Plans Are Here Again’!”