book report: Porterhouse Blue, Tom Sharpe

I’m on an academic-themed novel run at the moment, after Donna Tartt’s Secret History. Tom Sharpe’s Porterhouse Blue is, in its way, as concerned with tradition as Tartt’s novel, but has a totally different tone, one of rambunctious satirical comedy. In short, a Cambridge college, Porterhouse, acquires a new Master, who attempts to modernise affairs much to the chagrin of the old dons and staff.

Like all really good, enduring comedies (e.g. Withnail & I), it’s also about something – in this case, the absurdity of tradition and the absurdity of modernity. In our ghastly modern times, it is fashionable to critique tradition by pointing to its silliness & occasional inhumanities, without admitting modernity’s faults (a regulated, inescapable inhumanity, among others). Much of the novel is seen through the eyes of Skullion, a loyal college servant who has overseen decades of tradition.

He went back into the Porter’s Lodge and sat down again with his pipe. Around him the paraphernalia of his office, the old wooden clock, the counter, the rows of pigeonholes, the keyboard and the blackboard with ‘Message for Dr Messmer’ scrawled on it, were reassuring relics of his tenure and reminders that he was still needed. For forty-five years Skullion had sat in the Lodge watching over the comings and goings of Porterhouse until it seemed he was as much a part of the College as the carved heraldic beasts on the tower above. A lifetime of little duties easily attended to while the world outside stormed by in a maelstrom of change had bred in Skullion a devotion to the changelessness of Porterhouse traditions. When he’d first come there’d been an Empire, the greatest Empire that the world had known, a Navy, the greatest Navy in the world, fifteen battleships, seventy cruisers, two hundred destroyers, and Skullion had been a keyboard sentry on the Nelson with her three for’ard turrets and her arse cut off to meet the terms of some damn treaty. And now there was nothing left of that. Only Porterhouse was still the same. Porterhouse and Skullion, relics of an old tradition. As for the intellectual life of the College, Skullion neither knew nor cared about it. It was as incomprehensible to him as the rigmarole of a Latin mass to some illiterate peasant. They could say or think what they liked. It was the men he worshipped, some at least and fewer these days, their habits and the trappings he associated with that old assurance. The Dean’s ‘Good morning, Skullion’, Dr Huntley’s silk shirts, the Chaplain’s evening stroll around the Fellows’ Garden, Mr Lyons’ music evening every Friday, the weekly parcel from the Institute for Dr Baxter. Chapel, Hall, the Feast, the meeting of the College Council, all these occasions like internal seasons marked the calendar of Skullion’s life and all the time he looked for that assurance that had once been the hallmark of a gentleman.

When I think over the past, and what I miss, it is of course the architecture, the ethos of the old scholars (now mostly dead or retired or fired, to make way for the fashionable new academic), but also the people, the type. It once made sense to talk of a “gentleman”, of a man who acts according to a higher standard where it counts. Today, were one to say a coarse TV presenter or a traitor like Tony Blair is “not a gentleman” people would simply jeer. The notion of being a gentleman has been replaced by being a good SJW, a shrieking blue hair with BPD, or a smirking Blairite bureaucrat parroting the latest buzzwords (tolerance, respect, diversity, etc.)

Now sitting there with the gas fire hissing before him he searched his mind for what it was those old men signified. It wasn’t that they were clever. Some were, but half were stupid, more stupid than the young men coming up these days. Money? Some had a lot and others hadn’t. That wasn’t what had made the difference. To him at least. […] He spat into the fire affectionately and remembered an argument he’d had once with a young pup in a pub who’d heard him going on about the good old days.

‘What gentlemen?’ the lad had said. ‘A lot of rich bastards with nothing between their ears who just exploited you.’

And Skullion had put down his pint and said, ‘A gentleman stood for something. It wasn’t what he was. It was what he knew he ought to be. And that’s something you will never know.’ Not what they were but what they ought to be, like some old battle standard that you followed because it was a symbol of the best. A ragged tattered piece of cloth that stood for something and gave you confidence and something to fight for.

It’s not that the past was perfect, merely that the flipside of pointless snobbery was a reverence for the things that really mattered. And there is something endearing about the snobbery; for example reading this passage in 2020, where every grubby polytechnic calls itself a university, is an amusing experience – it concerns a research graduate called Zipser, with an undergraduate degree from Durham:

The Porter seemed to regard him as an interloper, and lavished a wealth of invective on him normally reserved for tradesmen. Zipser’s attempts to mollify him by explaining that Durham was a university and that there had been a Durham College in Oxford in 1380 had failed hopelessly. If anything, the mention of Oxford had increased Skullion’s antipathy.

I rather like a world where the University of Durham is regarded as a made-up institution. That’s snobbery done right. Even at my alma mater, which was not Cambridge, there was a pleasant sense of being excluded, by not having gone to one of the very best public schools, not having a Norman family tree, and so on. For me, it was somewhat like going to the theatre and knowing that I would always be in the audience, observing the curious ceremonies of those on stage:

‘Crumpets,’ said the Chaplain scurrying out of the bathroom. ‘Just the thing. You toast them.’ He speared a crumpet on the end of a toasting-fork and thrust the fork into Zipser’s hand. Zipser poked the crumpet at the fire tentatively and felt once again that dissociation from reality that seemed so much a part of life in Cambridge. It was as if everyone in the College sought to parody himself, as if a parody of a parody could become itself a new reality.

Of course all this has been undone now, and the parodic old dons have been replaced by parodic SJW blue hairs and their ilk. For example, the University of Durham’s website is full of such multicultural wonders:

No commentary required.

book report: Keepers of the Keys of Heaven

Keepers of the Keys of Heaven by Roger Collins.

This is more of a half- or failed-report, as I gave up 22% of the way through. It’s a history of the papacy, a topic that would be both challenging & promising for a historian, featuring as it does vast swathes of near-archival-oblivion, sundry tedious “waste of a pope” popes, but also marvellously hideous incidents and diabolical plots & poisonings.

Unfortunately, I found the book unengaging and at times outright badly-written. It is full of overly-long and overly-intricate sentences, e.g. “The peoples of the lands east of the Rhine in which the Anglo-Saxon missionaries worked had long been regarded by the Frankish kings as their subjects, even though this ceased to be a reality around 650.”

This was the sentence at which I decided to stop reading. It’s typical academic prose – gassy and bloated with clauses. The academic begins with an idea and then starts throwing more information in, like a man making a Negroni who decides to pour a bit of red wine in, why not, it’s a similar colour and has alcohol in it, eh?

It’s unclear if he means “Anglo-Saxon missionaries worked in all of the lands east of the Rhine” or “the Anglo-Saxon missionaries worked in some of the lands east of the Rhine”. From the syntax (I’ve forgotten the context, as I gave up on the book a couple of months ago, so I am working purely from the sentence construction) it sounds like “some of the lands” but I am unsure – it could be either.

In addition “this ceased to be a reality around 650”. What did? The work of the Anglo-Saxon missionaries? That’s the only thing which really makes sense to me, but to apply “this ceased to be a reality” here is awkward beyond belief. Yet what else could it mean? What else could have “ceased to be a reality”? That the people in these lands were perceived as subjects by the Frankish kings? But how can a perception cease to be a reality? It was always a perception, as distinct from reality, surely? Or does he mean that these peoples actually were subjects, and ceased to be so around 650, but the Frankish kings continued to perceive them as such?

This is typical of academic prose. Collins is undoubtedly far more learned (it’s pronounced /ˈlɜː(r)nɪd/) than me, and almost certainly far more intelligent, but he’s an academic and so cannot write English; and because I have to listen to mutilated English every day, I am disinclined to read it in my spare time.

The 22% I read was by no means bad, but there was no mastering vision to shape incidents & event, and perhaps for this reason the prose limps like a repeatedly sodomized tramp.

the modern academic

The Z Man:

It used to be that an intellectual mastered a subject in order to build on it. The point of his labor was not to prove he had read everyone in the field. The point was to find the gaps in his field and use the source material as a foundation for filling some of those gaps. In other words, the academic added to his field, rather than maintained it like a curator of a museum.

This shift from speculation to memorization reflects the shift in the culture, not just the education system. As a managerial system came to dominate the upper reaches of society, the education system became an exam system. You pass through the system in order to accumulate credentials that open doors within the managerial elite. The system began to select against people who question the current order. Instead, the system selects for those most likely to support and defend the system.

There is also the question of what to memorize. It is one thing to have a folder full of citations (c.f. Fowler et al. p344-6) to brandish like a porcupine’s quills or peacock’s tail; it is another to have a well-stocked memory of Western literature. At my (reputable) alma mater I found academics oddly uninterested in anything that couldn’t be ground into mincemeat for their latest research paper; and given the nature of academic publishing, that meant their interests were exceedingly narrow. One of my tutors specialised in modernism & post-modernism and hadn’t read Chaucer; another specialised in Milton and hadn’t read Dante.

The modern academic is a special form of ignoramus, stuffed with largely useless knowledge (e.g. the last decade of “research” into his topic). He cannot discern; cannot order; cannot think. To know what to memorise and why, to be able to transform information into knowledge, is to be old-fashioned, aberrant.