What I say, quoi

This is a transcript of an interview with Marie Rennard’s website Melting Pot that will appear in French only. It will read excellently in French, because Marie is an excellent translator, but this is the interview in its original form. I love reading French, but don’t want to write it. Vive la difference.

I'm all for it

Françoise Sagan disait qu’on naissait écrivain, ou romancier, mais qu’on ne pouvait le devenir. Etes-vous d’accord avec cette idée ?

I hope not. The idea that anyone is born to anything, unchangeably, is both frightening and reminiscent of the beliefs of my old friend from Dry Bones, John Calvin.  Francoise Sagan and John Calvin.  Now there’s an unexpected match.

Quels sont vos écrivains (ou livres) préférés, et pourquoi ?

I’m a big fan of Georges Perec, especially La Vie Mode d’Emploi.  For me, this is the greatest European novel since the end of the second world war, or, if you prefer, the greatest modern European novel.  One of its growing virtues is that it seems prescient – making sense of information overload by creating stories. This is a skill that we all increasingly need in everyday life.

Comment s’organise la construction intellectuelle d’un roman comme Le porteur d’os, à la fois créatif et basé sur des personnages réels ?

At some stage, the writer has to believe that there is no difference between the invented and the real.  As in the Bible, which is historically as convincing a text as any. It’s one challenge to make a novel out of anything – that’s the traditional creative act.  Like Perec, I’m trying to make novels out of everything.

Comment vous est venue l’idée d’exploiter le thème des reliques dans le porteur d’os ?

I didn’t go to the relics, the relics came to me.  I was wandering around the Cimetiere des Rois in Geneva, and very gradually began to realise that I knew many of the names on the tombstones.  This wasn’t a delusion.  I did know the names, because so many famous people retire to Switzerland and die into the graveyards of that beautiful country.  Then I started thinking about the influence of the dead, and the influence on us all of our particular heros (dead and alive), and from that point onwards the novel becomes a work of research and creative  synthesis.

Qu’est-ce qui a guidé votre choix des personnages ? (Thomas à Becket, Burton, Jung, Chaplin…)

Becket is the most famous English relic (though not kept in Geneva, or not all of him).  As for the others, they’re buried in Switzerland.

Le roman oscille entre questions existentielles, spiritualité et loufoque : quelle est la part nécessaire de loufoquerie et de spiritualité dans une existence ?

For me, whatever the existential question, materialism isn’t the answer.

Pourquoi, alors que l’essentiel des détails du roman sont authentiques (anecdotes relatives aux personnages exploités, situation géographique etc) d’autres, pourtant mineurs, sont ils délibérément falsifiés (comme par exemple le lieu de sépulture de Zamenhof ?) Le plaisir de piéger le lecteur, ou l’envie de le voir s’atteler à des recherches personnelles sur les personnages évoqués ?

Vous écrivez, dans le roman, que l’Angleterre est toujours plus loin qu’on ne croit. Qu’est-ce qui selon vous constitue la part la plus inaccessible de l’Angleterre pour les non-anglais ?

That’s a good question.  Like all nations (even France, especially France) England is constantly engaged in an identity crisis.  It’s tempting to say that the European part of the English identity is the least accessible, at least to Europeans, because our idea of Europe is shaped by being English.  Not to mention the relationship with the United Kingdom, and with Great Britain, with the Commonwealth and the Empire, with history and the sorry football team.  Maybe one of the ways in which a united Europe works, as an idea, is that all nations can wilfully simplify their sense of identity by buying into a generalised idea of Europe.

Vous êtes Directeur de la National Academy of Creative Writing. Peut-on enseigner l’art d’écrire, ou, plus exactement, la créativité ?

I can help writers with some basic geographical aids – compass, milometer, bathyscope.   But no more metaphors.  The answer is yes.  Both writing and creativity.  I think you can.  Yes.

Share

UEA Interview

Questions by Andrew Cowan, Course Director, MA in Creative Writing, UEA
Richard, what was your background – what were you doing before you came to UEA?

Writing.  Working.  Too much working (games teacher, barman, exhibition attendant, manservant) not enough writing.  I’d been out of college for six years, had finished four novels, the third of which enticed a nibble from a couple of agents.  One of them sent it to three or four publishers but it came straight back.

What prompted you to apply for the MA?

I wanted to write another novel, but not in the same way, or as a very wise man once said: if you do what you always do, you’ll get what you always get.  So I wanted to do the same thing, write a novel, but make it better and get it published.  A friend of mine was on the Contemporary Literature MA at East Anglia, studying with Lorna Sage, and he we was very persuasive about Norwich and the MA courses on offer – he said they were stimulating places to be.

You did the course in 1994/95.  Can you describe how it was structured then, and who taught you and what sort of things you were writing?

1994/5 was Malcolm Bradbury’s last year in charge.  I think it’s fair to say that after a quarter of a century tolerating the delusions of bright young writers he was fairly tired.  He was also the founder and figurehead of a programme that had earned international recognition, and the structure of the MA was determined by a strong sense that however Malcolm wanted to do it was the way it should be done.

What Malcolm did was to convene a weekly workshop. There were twelve of us in the class, and for three hours every Wednesday afternoon three students would offer up 5000 words to the others.  These novel extracts and stories were read in advance and discussed for a carefully timed one hour each.  Malcolm was scrupulous about the timing, and in an eight-week term everyone was guaranteed to have their writing worked over at least twice. I had an extra workshop on BBC 2 as part of a tribute to Malcolm on The Late Review.  To fit in with the camera angles we made a tight circle for the ‘fake’ workshop, which was then edited to make us look like conspirators intent on world literary domination.  The UEA mafia, as seen on TV.

Malcolm’s ideal workshop was unsullied by any kind of formal tuition.  He did once give us a handout he’d written called ‘Starting a Novel’.  I still have it.  It makes a lot of sense.  He also, once, drew a graph on the whiteboard to represent the narrative graph of comedy (down then up) and the graph of tragedy (up then down).  It looked like a kite.

After Christmas, in the second term, we had Russel Celyn Jones, now Professor of Creative Writing at Birkbeck.  Russell was loyal to Professor Bradbury’s model, except without the handout or the whiteboard diagram.  He did once ride my motorbike, though, and he knew what he was doing – I didn’t have to check he had a license.

How would you describe the experience of being on the course?

More adversarial than I’d expected.  I’d been asked in the interview, by Rose Tremain, how I’d feel about eleven strangers publicly criticizing my work.  Didn’t sound so bad to me.  What she forgot to mention was that none of those critics would remain strangers for long.  Within a month my writing was in a cross-fire between seven friends, two idiots and a couple of people whose motives I never entirely trusted.  These proportions could change, of course, depending on the comments the others made in any particular week, and whether I agreed with them.

As a group we weren’t always very successful at separating the work from the person.  Having said that, from the point of view of publication it was a tremendously successful year, possibly the most successful ever.  John Boyne, Bo Fowler, Sue Hubbard, Janette Jenkins and Toby Litt are all published novelists,.

How soon after the course before you started publishing?  What happened next for you?

I signed a contract while I was still at UEA, in February 2005, based on the first four chapters of the novel workshopped under Malcolm’s supervision.  There was therefore a direct connection, to my mind, between the course and getting published. I continued living in Norwich until the book was finished, and it was published the following November by the now defunct HarperCollins imprint Flamingo.  Not unusually, as a young first-time published novelist, I expected life and writing to be a breeze from there on in.  Bring on the dancing girls.

Do you think you might have gone on to publish regardless of having done an MA in Creative Writing?

I hope so.  I was already moving in the right direction, and had worked out the importance of being productive, of sitting down and sitting still and writing.  The MA then accelerated the process by providing a mixture of validation and reputation.  Getting on the course in the first place made me feel I must be doing something right.

Then there was the famous agents-and-students-party.  I remember this as a variation on Pimps and Strippers, everyone dressed to type, and I hope a version of this magnificently tense occasion still exists.  I met an agent among the black polo-necks and glasses of white wine, and for a professionally timid soul like me this manufactured interaction was invaluable.  I was never going to crash London literary parties wearing a green carnation – much easier to move to Norwich to write and learn among committed fellow students and have London come to us.

Your novels tend to be written to specific constraints, which require you to find inventive solutions.  For instance, all the nouns in your second novel Damascus are taken from one day’s edition of The Times.  Can you say a little about this method, what lies behind it and how you feel it determines the work?

My method in the early novels was strongly influenced by the ideas of the OuLiPo, a group of writers whose most famous members are Georges Perec and Italo Calvino (the terms of the OuLiPo explicitly state that death is not an obstacle to membership).

Damascus is a good example of how constraints can generate text.  Every noun in the novel comes from the Times newspaper of 1 November 1993.  There are many excellent reasons for this.  Among them, and true to lived experience, the main characters have to take life as they find it, meaning in this case the restricted possibilities offered by the limited nouns in one specific newspaper.  All they can do (all any of us can do) is to construct a life by re-arranging the arbitrary ingredients of every day as we encounter it.

I liked this constraint because it seemed democratic.  Anyone can take the same idea, even the same newspaper, and come up with a completely different story.

Finally, it’s worth saying that true to the vision of the OuLiPo the originating constraints should, as far as possible, remain concealed.  My first book X 20, A Novel of (not) Smoking, has a fiendish number-generated structure, but is essentially an old-fashioned story about desire, risk, repression and denial (the story of cigarettes).  Damascus is a love story with a happy ending.

In your third novel The Cartoonist the constraints are both self-imposed and legally imposed.  What happened there?

Some people enjoyed arguing that the constraints used to generate X 20 and Damascus were essentially arbitrary, and the books therefore suspect if not downright irrelevant.  I was looking for an elegant way to challenge this rather dim assumption, and settled on the constraints of real-life copyright and libel law.

The Cartoonist is set in EuroDisney © ™, and follows the adventures of an aspiring cartoonist and his firebrand social-activist teenage cousin, who is full of inventive ideas for sabotage.  The original story I wanted to tell takes place in the true-to-life theme-park which is visited by five million Europeans every year.

Before publication I then had re-write the novel, adhering strictly to copyright and libel laws, genuine down-to-earth, real-life, uninvented, unarbitrary constraints.  I discovered that it is not legally possible to set a novel (a made-up and fanciful story) in EuroDisney, even though that gated space outside Paris with its copyrighted characters is a location very much relevant to the world we live in now and the way we write about it.

There are therefore two versions of The Cartoonist.  The original, unpublishable novel.  And then the second, published version, as generated by the legal limitations I was constrained to observe.

In 2003 you moved into non-fiction with Muddied Oafs, a book about rugby and you and the professionalisation of the game.  You followed this with another book about sport, Manly Pursuits: Beating the Australians.  Did this move feel like a radical departure, or do you find continuities with your fiction writing?

While I was at UEA I played full-back for Norwich.  Later, when I was playing for Geneva, I frequently turned down opportunities to promote my novels because an important match was always coming up.  My exasperated agent eventually suggested, if the game was so important to me, that I write about my nomadic rugby life.  Good idea, I thought, and so did everyone else: nonfiction is the new fiction.  It didn’t take long to realise that what I was writing slotted very firmly into the category known as creative nonfiction.

I wasn’t writing a textbook, nor was I making stuff up, but my experience as a novelist meant I couldn’t help shaping the material to create an engaging narrative.  In that sense, the technical skills of novel-writing – in particular structure and character – are put to creative use in my nonfiction books.

Besides publishing seven books, you’ve also done a fair bit of teaching.  Are your methods very different from those employed when you were on the MA?

I have great respect for Malcolm’s ideal of the liberal, constructive, nurturing  workshop, and can’t think of many better ways to get the instant hit of coherent critical reaction to a piece of written prose.  I also think the workshop is a good place for writers to learn to defend and justify their creative choices, and so to fortify feelings of ownership over their own work.  However, the value of the workshop can vary depending on the stage any piece of writing has reached.  Discuss a story too soon and you’ll hear what you already know – it needs more work.  Workshop it too late, when you’ve already moved onto another project, and you won’t care enough to live and learn.

In my own teaching I’ve found that students often want more help in the I-know-it’s-not-ready-stage.  I’ve therefore developed a series of presentations and writing assignments that are designed to suggest, at the very least, what might be added or taken away, what can be re-ordered or re-thought.  In that sense, my teaching is more directive than the method I encountered at UEA..  It also has its weaknesses.

You taught for several years at the University of Tokyo.  You’ve also lived and worked in Hong Kong, Paris, Geneva, Strasbourg.  Can you describe how this might influence your writing – your outlook or sensibility, perhaps, your take on the world?

It can make me flighty.  I worry that this rootlessness means I never give myself the chance to observe deeply, or deeply enough over time, a single unique environment.  But then to paraphrase another wise man: trees have roots, people have legs.

On a good day, when the sun’s shining, I can convince myself I’m seeing more and doing more and generally taking care of the living half of the writer’s dilemma about how much to live and how much to write.  Travelling itself doesn’t count as living, I know that, but wherever I am I try to get involved.  In the end I don’t know how or how much it influences me and my writing, but if I could have been a better writer by staying put in Old Town, Swindon, then it’s too late.  I’ll never know.

Can you say a little about your latest book, Becoming Drusilla: One Life, Two Friends, Three Genders, what it’s about, how it came about?

Becoming Drusilla is a biography, a travelogue and a portrait of a friendship.  I used to go camping at least once a year with my friend Drew Marland, until she announced she was having a sex change.  We knew each other well enough to share a tent in January, so it wasn’t easy to accept that in a very important way I hadn’t known her at all.  My first reaction was to read the literature, but the technical transgender stuff was as impenetrable as literary theory, and the first-person testimonies usually followed a limiting and familiar pattern, ending with a jolly Hollywood resolution of self-acceptance and the sunset.

This didn’t reflect how it was for Dru, either how it had started or how it would end up.  There were also no books written from a friend’s point of view, so I decided to write what I couldn’t find to read.  After Dru’s operation we dusted off the tent and went walking again.  Our rainy and eventful trek around Wales is the frame for the story of what happened to Dru, and what it means for our friendship.

What’s next for you – what are you working on now?

I’m working on a novel, but then I’m always working on a novel.  Fellini used to complain that he could always get funding for his last film.  He meant that his backers were happy to fork out if the next film looked just the same as his most recent success, whereas Fellini wanted every next film to be different.  I always want to write something new, and this creates difficulties.  The first is that agents and publishers despair.  The second is that for every book I write I have to learn a new box of tricks, because all the solutions I learnt for the earlier books apply only to the problems those books created.

I’ve recently surprised myself by starting to write stories, which is something I’ve never properly done before.  I seem to have collected a stack of ideas that suit a short story of about seven to eight thousand words.  As any agent will tell you, this is a suicidal length at which to aim – there are hardly any UK magazines that can publish a story of this length.  Maybe that’s exactly why I find the idea liberating.  I don’t know, but when I arrived at UEA I thought all writing could be explained in terms of ambition and architecture.  These days I’m beginning to see it may be more mysterious than that.

Share

British Council Interview – Hearing Myself Think

Questions by Catriona Ferguson

 

Hearing Myself Think offers a fascinating snapshot of a contemporary, global world.  Was the story a deliberate attempt to examine where individuals place themselves within this epoch?

Well, the sense of ‘now’ inside the world’s busiest airport seemed like a promising place to start.  But I wouldn’t say I set out with such a grand theme in mind – the size of the idea would have been utterly disheartening.  Recently I seem to have spent a lot of time in airports surrounded by people I don’t know.  I always have the feeling I really should have bumped into someone by now, but I never have.  So I wondered why that might be, and how long I’d be stuck in Heathrow if I decided to hang around until I saw someone.  As in the conception of most of my short fiction, it was this daydreaming that began to take shape as a story when I looked at it more carefully.  There’s that moment when the brain clicks in and says ‘Yes, but what if, I mean really, if you were doing that, then why?  Where would you have travelled from?  How?  Why so desperate?  Why so friendless?’ 

The answers that come back are a mixture of autobiography, logic and observation (no, not the giant clown, what kind of people really come off airplanes?  Look closely.).  Then before I know it the story takes a shape and the characters find their places.  If the story turns out to be a convincing snapshot of a contemporary, global world, that means my observations must have been honest, my logic plausible, and my daydreams not so dissimilar to anyone else’s.  Writers sometimes get lucky like that.

Airports are significant meeting places, fill of poignant emotions as people reunite with loved ones.  Is that what attracted you to locating the story in an airport?

I like airports because they feel exciting and important.  Almost everybody is living a special day, the start of an adventure or the safe return of someone they love.  Or perhaps not, not anymore, not after all that time apart.  Either way, it’s a big moment.  Also, since 9/11, airports have become a point of political focus.  This is a place where the news could happen at any minute, and one of the thrills of a trip to the airport is the unusual sight (in Britain at least) of lethal sub-machine guns.  

At the same time, in direct contrast to all this free-floating significance, most people are sitting about and waiting and not doing very much.  I find this mixture of heightened expectation and enforced lethargy very stimulating.  It seems to provide the ideal conditions for thinking excitement through, and an airport can therefore turn into the perfect environment for chronic daydreamers like me.  We don’t always get the time or opportunity these days, but daydreaming is a great way of finding out who you are and what you want. 

Your central character is ostensibly hoping to meet somebody at Heathrow.  I also felt in reality he is hoping to discover something within himself.  Is this accurate or was he in fact trying to escape from himself?

He’s stuck.  He’s having a breakdown.  He’s done something irrational (driven his car to Heathrow airport for no apparent reason at six in the morning) and now his life is flashing before his eyes.  He condenses this irrational start to the day into a seemingly rational quest – to stay in the airport only as long as it takes to see someone he knows.  He then works through the logic of how best to achieve this.  Personally, I’d say this approach could count as recognisably male behaviour.  He is escaping the real issue (his domestic situation) by immersing himself in a seemingly unrelated task with a much clearer objective.  As it happens, on this occasion, the apparently arbitrary task he chooses does eventually lead to a kind of self-discovery, despite his own best efforts.

The character seems to be confused about his place in the world.  Were you deliberately trying to explore how men can lose their identity through being the day to day carer in a family?

Not entirely.  Heathrow airport conveniently raises the question of anyone’s place in the world, when from here you can fly to just about everywhere.  For this character, the airport is also a refuge, a sanctuary where he can escape (strange but true) the noise of the planes that roar over his house and also, he hopes, the guilty awareness of his domestic noises-off.  In the public space of the airport he is allowed a brief existence outside the family.  As the day wears on, he gradually loses or confuses his sense of himself, and can only rediscover the meaning and importance of home when rescued by his wife.  Probably not for the first time, either.  So I wouldn’t say this is a story advising men to get out of the house, no.

It feels almost as if the father is wrecked by the demands of his children, and yet he is also rescued by them at the airport.  What interests you about the role of children in relationships?

There are many reasons men succumb to stress, and this character suffers from nearly all of them.  He’s sexually tempted, professionally competitive, emotionally stretched, hopelessly nostalgic for other lives that could have been.  He could blame the children for most of this, but by the end of the story I hope it’s clear that this would probably be a mistake, or an excuse.  But to answer the question: one role of children in relationships can be, in some circumstances, to provide an excuse for all kinds of calamity.  Luckily, they have other possible roles as well.

This is a very humane story and we can sympathise with your central character, however, he is also slightly pathetic and self-absorbed.  How did you achieve this balance.

The very fact that he’s away from his family allows him to become absorbed in himself – he’s alone for once.  And people are self-obsessed in airports – thinking about where they’re going or where they’ve come from, sealed up in plans and flashbacks.  At the airport no-one has to interact who doesn’t want to.  Part of what makes this character sympathetic is that despite the license to look inwards, he wants to find someone he knows and make some kind of human contact.  This allows me to balance his enforced introspection against his very human need for other people.

As well as being a novelist, you are also a writer of non-fiction.  Do you have a preference for writing fiction or non-fiction?

Non-fiction is more fun.  But that’s because I write about my enthusiasms, whereas the fiction tends to feed off my anxieties.  The two do overlap of course.  I love the stories people tell me when I’m researching non-fiction books, because people everywhere turn out to be living astonishing stories all the time.  I don’t believe, however, that truth is necessarily stranger than fiction.  If it is, then maybe the fiction should be trying a little harder.

Share

Intervue Ecrire et Editer (in French)

Entretien à paraître en mars 2005 dans l’annuaire “L’année 2004 dans l’édition”, supplément de la revue Ecrire & Editer. Un numéro en vente au Salon du Livre de Paris.

Il y a quatre ans, lors de notre première rencontre, Richard Beard vivait dans la campagne anglaise. Il venait de publier son troisième roman, The Cartoonist, récit d’un sabotage rocambolesque dans un parc d’attraction modelé sur Disneyland Paris. Depuis l’artiste a changé d’air. Il s’est envolé pour Tokyo pour y enseigner l’écriture à de futurs ministres japonais. Il n’a pas abandonné le métier pour autant. Après Dry Bones , son quatrième roman, Beard s’est lancer dans la non-fiction. En pleine coupe du Monde de rugby 2003, il sort un petit succès populaire, Muddied Oafs. Un essai autobiographique qui entraine le lecteur dans le monde du ballon ovale en France, au Royaume-Uni et en Suisse. On lit désormais les chroniques sportives de cet Anglais francophile dans le Times de Londres deux fois par mois et l’on attend avec impatience sa prochaine oeuvre de fiction.
E&E : Qu’est-ce qui a changé pour toi en quatre ans ?
J’ai écrit pendant dix ans, huit heures par jour, cinq jour sur sept. Au bout d’un moment, l’esprit s’use à travailler ainsi. J’avais besoin d’un changement, d’une grande lessive. C’est pourquoi, j’ai cherché du travail à l’étranger. On m’a proposé un poste à l’Université de Tokyo, la plus prestigieuse du Japon. J’ai accepté, emportant armes, bagages, femme et enfants (deux bientôt trois) avec moi. Ici tout est tellement différent que j’ai l’impression de subir un nettoyage cérébral. J’ai prévu de rester trois ans pour suivre le programme complet, avec rinçage et essorage.

Ton regard sur l’édition : comment ce monde-là a-t-il évolué?

Il est plus difficile que jamais de vendre de la fiction. Tous les éditeurs sont en quête d’un nouveau Harry Potter. Et pas forcément du prochain Georges Perec. L’informatique a complètement bouleversé la donne. Désormais, les éditeurs peuvent suivre l’évolution des ventes au quotidien dans toutes les librairies d’Angleterre. On ne peut donc plus échapper à la réalité économique.

Cela a-t-il modifié tes choix d’écriture?

Bien au contraire. Les changements dans l’édition ne signifient pas qu’il faille cesser de produire des romans de qualité. Personnellement, j’ai fait l’erreur avec The Cartoonist, mon troisième roman, de vouloir plaire au public. Ca n’a pas marché et je n’ai plus recommencé. Pour Dry Bones, je suis revenu à ce qui m’intéresse, à de l’expérimental. L’accueil fut nettement plus favorable.

Quel en est le sujet?

L’histoire d’un vicaire anglican basé à Genève qui veut sauver son église de la fermeture. Pour récolter des fonds, il récupère dans les cimetières suisses les ossements de personnalités qui y sont enterrées (En général, ces gens-là finissent en Suisse pour échapper aux critiques et aux impôts). Or, les os récoltés vont agir sur le prêtre comme des reliques traditionnelles. Le vicaire découvre que son comportement change en fonction des restes qu’il récupère. Quand il essaie de vendre les os de l’acteur Richard Burton, il devient alcoolique et coureur de jupons. Quand c’est Charlie Chaplin, il trébuche sans cesse, poursuivi par la police. Ca complique l’intrigue avec des accélérations de rythme incessantes. Et puis, c’est un moyen de travailler le personnage. C’est très amusant à écrire.

Tu es chez le même éditeur depuis le début?

Pas du tout, j’ai changé trois fois d’éditeur et d’agent littéraire (vecteur essentiel entre l’auteur et l’éditeur chez les Anglo-Saxons). Mais c’était toujours des grosses maisons. Je reste pour l’instant chez Random House plutôt que chez un éditeur indépendant. J’y trouve la sécurité et une plus large distribution. Mes deux premiers bouquins ressortent chez Vintage cette année. Un film inspiré de Damascus (mon deuxième roman) est en préparation. Et le même roman a été traduit en hébreu, en russe et en japonais. Mais hélas pas encore en français !

C’est donc ta stratégie qui évolue?

Oui, il faut rester souple. Sans faire du commercial, on peut diversifier la production. C’est pourquoi je me suis lancé dans la non-fiction. Et ça fonctionne. J’ai sorti un livre sur le rugby, ma deuxième passion, qui s’est plutôt bien vendu. J’ai décroché ainsi une chronique bimensuelle dans le Times. Et conclu un contrat pour un nouveau récit de voyage sportif qui m’amènera en Australie l’été prochain. A la plage!

Toujours sur le rugby?

Pas seulement. Sur la place du sport dans la société australienne. On dit qu’ils en ont fait leur religion.

As-tu trouvé d’autres moyens de te diversifier?

J’ai lancé mon propre site Internet (www.richardbeard.info). Il faut exploiter les avantages des nouvelles technologies. Avec cette vitrine électronique, je ne dépends plus seulement des agents de publicité. Je peux me vendre seul, exposer, présenter mon travail à ma guise, mieux me faire connaître de mes lecteurs et de ceux qui ne le sont pas encore. Il y a aussi la chronique. L’écriture journalistique est un défi. Ecrire en sept cents mots une histoire qu’on aimerait parfois tirer à deux mille… C’est comme un spring pour athlète. Ca peut être douloureux. Mais c’est un bon entrainement. J’ai aussi publié des nouvelles et des articles dans quelques magazines, et pas seulement sur le sport.

Tes projets littéraires?

J’ai commencé ce que j’appelle mon ‘chef d’oeuvre’. je dis toujours cela. Mais cette fois j’ai bien l’intention d’y mettre tout ce que je sais.

D’autres projets?

Gagner ma vie en écrivant et. jouer pour l’Angleterre au Stade de France.

Il y a quatre ans, tu nous avais confié tes « dix commandements ». Tu les conserves en l’état ?

Oui, tels quels. Mais j’en ajoute un onzième : n’abandonne jamais. L’essentiel est de pouvoir continuer ce métier, même si tu ne deviens jamais J.K. Rowling.

Note bibliographique

Richard Beard a publié quatre romans. Pour les deux premiers, l’auteur s’est inspiré des techniques oulipiennes en s’imposant des contraintes de départ. X20 (Flamingo 1996) raconte l’histoire d’un homme qui essaie d’arrêter de fumer. Chaque fois qu’il est tenté de recommencer, il saisit sa plume pour écrire. Damascus (Flamingo 1998) est un roman d’amour dont l’intrigue se déroule sur une seule journée. Tous les noms de l’ouvrage sont empruntés à l’édition du Times du 1er novembre 1993 (date du Traité de Maastricht). Pour ses deux derniers romans, Beard a changé de méthode. Dans The Cartoonist (Bloomsbury 2000), l’auteur s’est plié à des contraintes sociales. Il n’a pu, sans se mettre à dos les avocats de Disney, situer l’intrigue du livre à Disneyland Paris. Il a donc réécrit l’ouvrage avec des limites qui lui évitaient un procès en diffamation. Pour Dry Bones (Random House 2004), le travail expérimental s’attache au protagoniste, dont le comportement varie en fonction des reliques exhumées. Pour Muddied Oafs, premier essai autobiographique, Richard Beard change de genre et conjugue amour du rugby et écriture. Curieux de savoir ce que le jeu est devenu à l’ère du professionnalisme, il retourne dans des clubs fréquentés en Angleterre, en Ecosse, au SCUF à Paris et à Genève. Qu’on se le dise enfin: quel qu’en soit le sujet, l’oeuvre de Richard Beard demeure accessible, drôle et originale.

 

 

 

Share

Interview Sophie Calle et Gregoire Bouillier (in French)

 

Deux artistes un ecrivain

 

Quand êtes-vous déjà mort?

J’essaie de ne pas penser à la mort. Je préfère penser à la vie.

Qu’est-ce qui vous fait lever le matin?

Mes enfants.

Que sont devenus vos rêves d’enfant?

Des rêves d’adulte.

Qu’est-ce qui vous distingue des autres?

Comme tout le monde, je crois être différent des autres.

Vous manque-t-il quelque chose?

Tellement de choses…

Pensez-vous que tout le monde puisse être artiste?

Quoi qu’on crée, il y aura toujours quelqu’un quelquepart pour trouver que c’est de l’art. 

D’où venez-vous?

De l’étranger, du sud-ouest, de la ville voisine, de la porte voisine: tout dépend où je suis.

Jugez-vous votre sort enviable?

Par qui? Il y a des gens mieux lotis, et d’autres moins. Les livres me l’ont appris.

A quoi avez-vous renoncé?

Aux cigarettes et peut-être à la foi du romancier.

Que faites-vous de votre argent?

Quel argent?

Quelle tâche ménagère vous rebute le plus?

Passer la serpillère.

Quels sont vos plaisirs favoris?

Le sport, le rugby, et mériter une bonne bière.

Qu’aimeriez-vous recevoir pour votre anniversaire?

Une surprise.  Une activité. Plutôt quelque chose à faire qu’à posséder

Citez trois artistes que vous détestez?

Ceux que je déteste ne peuvent être artistes. Sinon je ne les détesterais pas.

Que défendez-vous?

La ligne d’essai.

Qu’êtes-vous capable de refuser?

Pas grand chose

Quelle est la partie de votre corps la plus faible?

Les genoux comme tout rugbyman.

Qu’avez-vous été capable de faire par amour?

Le repassage

Que vous reproche-t-on?

L’indécision. Je crois…

A quoi vous sert l’art?

Ca me permet de ne pas me sentir seul.

Rédigez votre épitaphe.

«Richard Beard: Un phénomène! 1967- 2367»

Sous quelle forme aimeriez-vous revenir?

Le même en mieux.

Share