CP 03988/en: Difference between revisions

From Corr-Proust Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page with "<ref name="n1"> Note 1 </ref>")
No edit summary
 
(31 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown)
Line 2: Line 2:
<languages />
<languages />


=[http://www.corr-proust.org/letter/03988 Marcel Proust à André Chaumeix <nowiki>[peu après le 12 décembre 1919]</nowiki>]=  
=[http://www.corr-proust.org/letter/03988 Marcel Proust to André Chaumeix <nowiki>[shortly after 12 December 1919 ]</nowiki>]=
<small>(Click on the link above to see this letter and its notes in the ''Corr-Proust'' digital edition, including all relevant hyperlinks.)</small>


<ref name="n1" />
<ref name="n1" />
Line 8: Line 9:
44 rue Hamelin
44 rue Hamelin


Cher Monsieur
Dear Sir,


Je reçois à l'instant votre lettre<ref name="n2" /> et je vous en remercie mille fois. La mienne était je le vois le résultat d'une erreur. Je vous croyais directeur des Débats, ou rédacteur en chef et je pensais qu'ainsi vous pouviez faire faire un article. Mais jamais, même quand je le croyais, il n'était entré dans ma pensée de vous demander d'influencer M. de Pierrefeu<ref name="n3" /> dans un sens ou dans un autre. J'ai trop pour cela le respect de la pensée, et eussiez-vous le pouvoir de le faire, que j'eusse été chagriné que vous en usiez. Mon regret avait été simplement que vous n'eussiez pas demandé l'article à quelqu'un de favorable plutôt qu'hostile, surtout après les malentendus de presse nés du fait que ma maladie en m' empêchant de recevoir les journalistes, mes éditeurs en les recevant mal, les ont froissés, et que l'idée absurde que c'était un prix « politique » a tout compliqué. Je n'ai naturellement rien rectifié ni en ce qui concerne mon âge, ou ma situation de fortune, ou mes opinions politiques etc. Hélas vous n'êtes plus critique littéraire des Débats, et vous n'en êtes pas non plus directeur. Mais votre sympathie m'est plus précieuse que les articles que vous auriez pu dans le premier cas faire, dans le second cas faire faire sur moi. Pour en finir avec tout cela, si vous avez quelquefois l'occasion de causer avec M. de Pierrefeu, vous pourrez lui dire que le dernier chapitre de mon œuvre ayant été écrit avant le premier<ref name="n4" />, et tout l'ouvrage étant fait et terminé, il n'a pas besoin d'attendre ma mort comme il dit pour voir finir à la Recherche du Temps Perdu<ref name="n5" /> (titre détestable qui je le reconnais trompe sur la composition serrée de l'œuvre). Cette composition est si inflexible<ref name="n6" /> que M. Francis Jammes m'ayant adjuré d'ôter de « Du Côté de chez Swann » un épisode qui le choquait<ref name="n7" />, j'ai été sur le point de lui donner satisfaction, cet épisode étant en effet inutile dans le premier volume. Mais je me suis rendu compte que si je l'enlevais, le troisième et quatrième volumes étaient détruits puisque c'est le ressouvenir de cet épisode qui en excitant la jalousie du narrateur (celui qui dit je et qui n'est pas toujours moi<ref name="n8" />) amenait ce qu'on appelait au théâtre la péripétie<ref name="n9" />. Je renonce donc, les Débats n'ayant pas parlé de la Vie Heureuse<ref name="n10" />, à toute rectification. Je vous enverrai quand il paraîtra mon article sur Flaubert<ref name="n11" />, non pour que vous fassiez parler de lui, puisque vous n'avez pas aux Débats le genre de situation que je croyais, mais afin, si vous avez la bonté de le parcourir, de vous montrer que je fais plus attention aux questions de grammaire qu'on ne dit. Du reste de quel peintre n'a-t-on pas dit qu'il ne savait pas dessiner, de quel musicien qu'il ne savait pas l'harmonie.
I have only just received your letter<ref name="n2" /> and I am much obliged. I see that mine was the result of an error. I thought you were the director of the Débats, or editor-in-chief and so I thought you could have had an article written. But never, even when I thought that was the case, did it enter my mind to ask you to exert your influence over M. de Pierrefeu<ref name="n3" />, in one way or another. I have too much respect for freedom of thought for that, and if you had the power to do so, I would have been sorry had you used it. Simply put, my concern was that you commissioned the article from someone hostile rather than favourable, especially after the misunderstandings in the press arising from an illness that prevented me from receiving journalists, my publishers not receiving them well, which upset them, and the absurd idea that it was a "political" cost complicated everything. Naturally, I haven’t corrected anything that concerns my age, my financial situation, or political opinions, etc. Alas, you are no more the literary critic of the Débats than its director. But your sympathy is more precious to me than the articles you would have written about me in the first case, or in the second case, to have had written about me. To put all this to rest, if you were to get the chance to speak to M. de Pierrefeu, you could tell him that the last chapter of my novel, having been written before the first<ref name="n4" />, and all the writing having been done and dusted, he won’t have to wait for my death as he suggests to see À la Recherche du Temps Perdu finished<ref name="n5" /> (I recognise that this loathsome title may betray the strict structure of the book). Its composition is so rigid<ref name="n6" /> that M. Francis Jammes, having urged me to remove from Du Côté de chez Swann a scene that shocked him<ref name="n7" />, I was on the verge of giving in to his request, this scene being in fact irrelevant to the first volume. But I realised that if I removed it, the third and fourth volumes would be destroyed since it’s the recollection of this scene which, in inspiring the jealousy of the narrator, (he who says “I” and who is not necessarily me)<ref name="n8" /> brought on what one would call in the the theatre, “peripeteia”<ref name="n9" />. I refuse, then, Les Débats not having mentioned la Vie Heureuse<ref name="n10" />, any rectification. I will send you my article on Flaubert<ref name="n11" /> once it’s published, not so that you can talk about it, since you don’t have the position at Les Débats that I thought you had, but so, in case you’re kind enough to read it, you see that I pay more attention to matters of grammar than has been suggested. Besides, what artist has not been told that he could not draw? What musician has not been told that he could not harmonise?


Tout cela n'empêche pas que M. de Pierrefeu ait beaucoup de talent et il a bien raison de dire j'aime quand il aime, et je n'aime pas quand il n'aime pas.
All of this does not prevent M. de Pierrefeu from being very talented, and he is quite right to say when he likes something, and to say when he does not.


Veuillez agréer cher Monsieur avec ma sympathie reconnaissante et profonde, l'expression de mes sentiments admiratifs et dévoués.
Please accept, dear Sir, with my deep gratitude and sympathy, this expression of my admiration and devotion.


Marcel Proust
Marcel Proust
Line 23: Line 24:
<references>
<references>


<ref name="n1"> Note 1 </ref>
<ref name="n1"> This letter follows on shortly after the letter to the same recipient of "Friday evening" [12 December 1919] (CP 03983; Kolb, XVIII, no. 303). [PK] </ref>


<ref name="n2"> Lettre non retrouvée. [FP] </ref>
<ref name="n2"> Letter has not been found. [FP] </ref>


<ref name="n3"> Proust revient ici sur l'article de Jean de Pierrefeu, paru en première page du Journal des débats du 12 décembre 1919 : voir sa lettre CP 03983. [FP] </ref>
<ref name="n3"> Proust is referring back to the article by Jean de Pierrefeu which appeared on the front page of Le Journal des débats, 12 December 1919: see letter CP 03983. [FP] </ref>


<ref name="n4"> Proust rapproche souvent dans sa correspondance avec les critiques les premier et dernier chapitres de son livre, pour insister sur le caractère médité et construit de son oeuvre. Parfois, comme ici, il place d'abord la rédaction de la fin : « Le dernier chapitre du dernier volume, non encore paru, a été écrit avant le premier chapitre du premier volume » (CP 04159 ; Kolb, XIX, 121, à Alberto Lumbroso, [le 14 mai 1920]) ; « On méconnaît trop en effet que mes livres sont une construction, mais à ouverture de compas assez étendue pour que la composition, rigoureuse et à qui j’ai tout sacrifié, soit assez longue à discerner. On ne pourra le nier quand la dernière page du Temps retrouvé (écrite avant le reste du livre) se refermera exactement sur la première de Swann » (CP 04877 ; Kolb, XXI, 16, à Benjamin Crémieux, [le 18 ou 19 janvier 1922]). Mais il lui arrive aussi d'écrire l'inverse, notamment en décembre 1919 : « [] le dernier chapitre du dernier volume a été écrit tout de suite après le premier chapitre du premier volume. Tout l’“entre-deux” a été écrit ensuite [] » (CP 03995 ; Kolb, XVIII, 315, à Paul Souday, [le 17 décembre 1919]) ; « le dernier chapitre du dernier volume, non paru, a été écrit tout de suite après le premier chapitre du premier volume » (CP 03999 ; Kolb, XVIII, 319, à Rosny aîné, [peu avant le 23 décembre 1919]). [NM] </ref>
<ref name="n4"> In his correspondence with critics Proust often brings up the first and last chapter of his book, to insist upon the planned and deliberately constructed nature of his work. Sometimes, as here, he places the writing of the ending first: "The last chapter of the last volume, which has not yet been published, was written before the first chapter of the first volume" (CP 04159; Kolb, XIX, no. 121, to Alberto Lumbroso [14 May 1920]); "It is in fact too often overlooked that my books have been constructed, but with an open compass extended sufficiently wide so that its rigorous composition, for which I have sacrificed everything, takes a long time to reveal itself. It can't be denied when the last page of Le Temps retrouvé (written before the rest of the book) comes back full circle to the first page of Swann" (CP 04877; Kolb, XXI, no. 16, to Benjamin Crémieux, [18 or 19 January 1922]). But he sometimes writes the opposite, notably in December 1919: "[...] the last chapter of the last volume was written immediately after the first chapter of the first volume. Everything 'in between' was written afterwards [...]" (CP 03995; Kolb, XVIII, no. 315, to Paul Souday, [17 December 1919]); "the last chapter of the last volume, which has not yet been published, was written immediately after the first chapter of the first volume" (CP 03999; Kolb, XVIII, no. 319, to Rosny the elder, [shortly after 23 December 1919]). [NM] </ref>


<ref name="n5"> Paraphrase de l'article de Jean de Pierrefeu : « Depuis lors il a joint à ce premier livre [Du côté de chez Swann] un second qui le prolonge et il en prépare deux autres sur le même thème. Rien ne prouve qu'il s'arrêtera en si beau chemin. À mon avis, la fatigue ou la mort seules peuvent l'arrêter dans la tâche qu'il a entreprise de rechercher le temps perdu par lui [] ». [PK, FP] </ref>
<ref name="n5"> Paraphrase of Jean de Pierrefeu's article: "Since then he has added to this first book [Du côté de chez Swann] a second which continues it and he is preparing two more of them on the same theme. There is nothing to suggest that he will come to a halt on such a glorious path. In my opinion only fatigue or death could stop him on the task that he has undertaken in his search for lost time [...]" [PK, FP] </ref>


<ref name="n6"> L'adjectif « inflexible » revient régulièrement sous la plume de Proust quand il veut décrire la composition ou la « construction » de son roman : voir, entre août et décembre 1919, ses lettres à Abel Hermant (CP 03897 ; Kolb, XVIII, 216), Jacques Boulenger (CP 03998 ; Kolb, XVIII, 318) et Rosny aîné (CP 03999 ; Kolb, XVIII, 319). [NM] </ref>
<ref name="n6"> The adjective "inflexible" (rigid) appears regularly in Proust's writing when he wants to describe the composition or the "construction" of his novel: see his letters, between August and December 1919, to Abel Hermant (CP 03897; Kolb, XVIII, no. 216), Jacques Boulenger (CP 03998; Kolb, XVIII, no. 318) and Rosny the elder (CP 03999; Kolb, XVIII, no. 319). [NM] </ref>


<ref name="n7"> La lettre que Jammes a adressée à Proust après avoir lu Du côté de chez Swann en novembre ou décembre 1913 n'a pas été retrouvée, mais Proust en cite un long passage dans une lettre à Henri Ghéon du [vendredi 2 janvier 1914] (CP 02655 ; Kolb, XIII, 3). Proust explique dans sa lettre à Paul Souday du 10 novembre 1919 (CP 03946 ; Kolb, XVIII, 266) que l'épisode en question est « une scène entre deux jeunes filles », c'est-à-dire la scène de sadisme de Montjouvain (RTP, I, 157-163). [PK, FP, NM] </ref>
<ref name="n7"> The letter that Jammes addressed to Proust after reading Du côté de chez Swann in November or December 1913 has not been found, but Proust quotes a long passage from it in a letter to Henri Ghéon [Friday 2 January 1914] (CP 02655; Kolb, XIII, no. 3). Proust explains in his letter to Paul Souday of 10 November 1919 (CP 03946; Kolb, XVIII, no. 266) that the episode in question is "a scene between two young girls," that is to say the sadism episode at Montjouvain (RTP, I, 157-163). [PK, FP, NM] </ref>


<ref name="n8"> La formule, qui marque une inflexion importante par rapport aux propos publics de Proust lors de la sortie de Swann (« le personnage qui raconte, qui dit : "Je" [] n'est pas moi », EA, p. 558), est présente dans l'article sur Flaubert qu'il mentionne page suivante, et qu'il a remis quelques jours auparavant à Jacques Rivière pour la Nouvelle Revue Française (CP 03971 ; Kolb, XVIII, 291) : « [le] narrateur qui dit "je" et qui n'est pas toujours moi » (EA, p. 599). [NM] </ref>
<ref name="n8"> The formula, which marks an important change of voice compared to Proust's public statements at the time of the publication of Swann ("the character who is narrating, who says: 'I' [...] is not me," EA, p. 558), occurs in the article on Flaubert that he mentions on the next page, and which he had sent to Jacques Rivière a few days earlier for La Nouvelle Revue Française (CP 03971; Kolb, XVIII, no. 291): "[the] narrator who says 'I' and who is not always me" (EA, p. 599). [NM] </ref>


<ref name="n9"> Voir la lettre-dédicace à Madame Scheikévitch de [peu après le 3 novembre 1915] (CP 03024), p. 2 : « j'aimerais mieux vous présenter les personnages que vous ne connaissez pas encore, celui surtout qui joue le plus grand rôle et amène la péripétie, Albertine ». Sur l'importance structurelle que Proust accorde à la scène de sadisme, voir aussi ses lettres à François Mauriac du [23 ou 24 septembre 1919] (CP 03911 ; Kolb, XVIII, 230), à André Chaumeix du [12 décembre 1919] (CP 03988 ; Kolb, XVIII, 308), et à Jean Ajalbert de [peu après le 10 décembre 1919] (CP 05359). [FP, NM] </ref>
<ref name="n9"> See the letter-dedication to Madame Scheikévitch of [shortly after 3 November 1915] (CP 03024), p. 2: "I would prefer to introduce you to some characters that you don’t yet know, one above all who plays the most important role and determines the turn of events, Albertine." On the structural importance Proust accords to the sadism scene see also his letters to François Mauriac of [23 or 24 September 1919] (CP 03911; Kolb, XVIII, no. 230), to André Chaumeix of [12 December 1919] (CP 03988; Kolb, XVIII, no. 308) and to Jean Ajalbert of [shortly after 10 December 1919] (CP 05359). [FP, NM] </ref>


<ref name="n10"> Le prix de la Vie Heureuse (prix Fémina) de 1919 fut décerné aux Croix de bois de Roland Dorgelès, le concurrent malheureux de Proust au Goncourt. [PK] </ref>
<ref name="n10"> The Vie Heureuse prize (Prix Femina) for 1919 was awarded to Les croix de bois by Roland Dorgelès, Proust's unsuccessful rival for the Prix Goncourt. [PK] </ref>


<ref name="n11"> Peu après le 13 novembre 1919, Proust avait proposé à Jacques Rivière un article sur le style de Flaubert, en réponse à un article d'Albert Thibaudet sur ce même sujet dans la Nouvelle Revue Française (« Réflexions sur la littérature : Sur le style de Flaubert », 1er novembre 1919, p. 942-953) : « S'il pouvait vous être agréable de publier une lettre de moi sur le Style de Flaubert (en réponse à M. Thibaudet) et sur la manière défectueuse qu'on a de juger les grands écrivains, en général, je pourrais écrire un très court article, une note » (CP 03950 ; Kolb, XVIII, 270). Le 5 décembre, Proust annonce qu'il travaille à « un long Flaubert », « cet énorme Flaubert » (CP 03968 ; Kolb, XVIII, 288). Le 8 ou le 9 décembre, Proust livre à Jacques Rivière un manuscrit d'une soixantaine de pages (CP 03971 ; Kolb, XVIII, 291) qui paraîtra dans la NRF du 1er janvier 1920 sous le titre « À propos du "style" de Flaubert » (p. 72-90). [CSz] </ref>
<ref name="n11"> Shortly after 13 November 1919 Proust had proposed an article on Flaubert's style to Jacques Rivière, in response to an article by Albert Thibaudet in La Nouvelle Revue Française on the same subject, ("Réflexions sur la littérature : Sur le style de Flaubert," 1 November 1919, p. 942-953): "If it would be agreeable to you to publish a letter by me on Flaubert's style (in response to M. Thibaudet) and on the defective methods by which we judge great writers in general, I could write a very short article or a note (CP 03950; Kolb, XVIII, no. 270). On 5 December Proust announces that he is working on "a long Flaubert," "this enormous Flaubert" (CP 03971; Kolb, XVIII, no. 288). On 8 or 9 December Proust sends Jacques Rivière a sixty page manuscript (CP 03971; Kolb, XVIII, no. 291) which was to appear in the NRF of 1 january 1920 under the title "À propos du 'style' de Flaubert" (p. 72-90). [CSz] </ref>


<ref name="n12"> (Notes de traduction) </ref>
<ref name="n12"> Translation notes: </ref>


<ref name="n13"> (Contributeurs) </ref>
<ref name="n13"> Contributors: Nseeligschattner, Shmackinnon, Sspasevska, Yorktaylors </ref>


</references>
</references>

Latest revision as of 19:19, 10 October 2021

Other languages:

Marcel Proust to André Chaumeix [shortly after 12 December 1919 ]

(Click on the link above to see this letter and its notes in the Corr-Proust digital edition, including all relevant hyperlinks.)

[1]

44 rue Hamelin

Dear Sir,

I have only just received your letter[2] and I am much obliged. I see that mine was the result of an error. I thought you were the director of the Débats, or editor-in-chief and so I thought you could have had an article written. But never, even when I thought that was the case, did it enter my mind to ask you to exert your influence over M. de Pierrefeu[3], in one way or another. I have too much respect for freedom of thought for that, and if you had the power to do so, I would have been sorry had you used it. Simply put, my concern was that you commissioned the article from someone hostile rather than favourable, especially after the misunderstandings in the press arising from an illness that prevented me from receiving journalists, my publishers not receiving them well, which upset them, and the absurd idea that it was a "political" cost complicated everything. Naturally, I haven’t corrected anything that concerns my age, my financial situation, or political opinions, etc. Alas, you are no more the literary critic of the Débats than its director. But your sympathy is more precious to me than the articles you would have written about me in the first case, or in the second case, to have had written about me. To put all this to rest, if you were to get the chance to speak to M. de Pierrefeu, you could tell him that the last chapter of my novel, having been written before the first[4], and all the writing having been done and dusted, he won’t have to wait for my death as he suggests to see À la Recherche du Temps Perdu finished[5] (I recognise that this loathsome title may betray the strict structure of the book). Its composition is so rigid[6] that M. Francis Jammes, having urged me to remove from Du Côté de chez Swann a scene that shocked him[7], I was on the verge of giving in to his request, this scene being in fact irrelevant to the first volume. But I realised that if I removed it, the third and fourth volumes would be destroyed since it’s the recollection of this scene which, in inspiring the jealousy of the narrator, (he who says “I” and who is not necessarily me)[8] brought on what one would call in the the theatre, “peripeteia”[9]. I refuse, then, Les Débats not having mentioned la Vie Heureuse[10], any rectification. I will send you my article on Flaubert[11] once it’s published, not so that you can talk about it, since you don’t have the position at Les Débats that I thought you had, but so, in case you’re kind enough to read it, you see that I pay more attention to matters of grammar than has been suggested. Besides, what artist has not been told that he could not draw? What musician has not been told that he could not harmonise?

All of this does not prevent M. de Pierrefeu from being very talented, and he is quite right to say when he likes something, and to say when he does not.

Please accept, dear Sir, with my deep gratitude and sympathy, this expression of my admiration and devotion.

Marcel Proust

[12] [13]

Notes

  1. This letter follows on shortly after the letter to the same recipient of "Friday evening" [12 December 1919] (CP 03983; Kolb, XVIII, no. 303). [PK]
  2. Letter has not been found. [FP]
  3. Proust is referring back to the article by Jean de Pierrefeu which appeared on the front page of Le Journal des débats, 12 December 1919: see letter CP 03983. [FP]
  4. In his correspondence with critics Proust often brings up the first and last chapter of his book, to insist upon the planned and deliberately constructed nature of his work. Sometimes, as here, he places the writing of the ending first: "The last chapter of the last volume, which has not yet been published, was written before the first chapter of the first volume" (CP 04159; Kolb, XIX, no. 121, to Alberto Lumbroso [14 May 1920]); "It is in fact too often overlooked that my books have been constructed, but with an open compass extended sufficiently wide so that its rigorous composition, for which I have sacrificed everything, takes a long time to reveal itself. It can't be denied when the last page of Le Temps retrouvé (written before the rest of the book) comes back full circle to the first page of Swann" (CP 04877; Kolb, XXI, no. 16, to Benjamin Crémieux, [18 or 19 January 1922]). But he sometimes writes the opposite, notably in December 1919: "[...] the last chapter of the last volume was written immediately after the first chapter of the first volume. Everything 'in between' was written afterwards [...]" (CP 03995; Kolb, XVIII, no. 315, to Paul Souday, [17 December 1919]); "the last chapter of the last volume, which has not yet been published, was written immediately after the first chapter of the first volume" (CP 03999; Kolb, XVIII, no. 319, to Rosny the elder, [shortly after 23 December 1919]). [NM]
  5. Paraphrase of Jean de Pierrefeu's article: "Since then he has added to this first book [Du côté de chez Swann] a second which continues it and he is preparing two more of them on the same theme. There is nothing to suggest that he will come to a halt on such a glorious path. In my opinion only fatigue or death could stop him on the task that he has undertaken in his search for lost time [...]" [PK, FP]
  6. The adjective "inflexible" (rigid) appears regularly in Proust's writing when he wants to describe the composition or the "construction" of his novel: see his letters, between August and December 1919, to Abel Hermant (CP 03897; Kolb, XVIII, no. 216), Jacques Boulenger (CP 03998; Kolb, XVIII, no. 318) and Rosny the elder (CP 03999; Kolb, XVIII, no. 319). [NM]
  7. The letter that Jammes addressed to Proust after reading Du côté de chez Swann in November or December 1913 has not been found, but Proust quotes a long passage from it in a letter to Henri Ghéon [Friday 2 January 1914] (CP 02655; Kolb, XIII, no. 3). Proust explains in his letter to Paul Souday of 10 November 1919 (CP 03946; Kolb, XVIII, no. 266) that the episode in question is "a scene between two young girls," that is to say the sadism episode at Montjouvain (RTP, I, 157-163). [PK, FP, NM]
  8. The formula, which marks an important change of voice compared to Proust's public statements at the time of the publication of Swann ("the character who is narrating, who says: 'I' [...] is not me," EA, p. 558), occurs in the article on Flaubert that he mentions on the next page, and which he had sent to Jacques Rivière a few days earlier for La Nouvelle Revue Française (CP 03971; Kolb, XVIII, no. 291): "[the] narrator who says 'I' and who is not always me" (EA, p. 599). [NM]
  9. See the letter-dedication to Madame Scheikévitch of [shortly after 3 November 1915] (CP 03024), p. 2: "I would prefer to introduce you to some characters that you don’t yet know, one above all who plays the most important role and determines the turn of events, Albertine." On the structural importance Proust accords to the sadism scene see also his letters to François Mauriac of [23 or 24 September 1919] (CP 03911; Kolb, XVIII, no. 230), to André Chaumeix of [12 December 1919] (CP 03988; Kolb, XVIII, no. 308) and to Jean Ajalbert of [shortly after 10 December 1919] (CP 05359). [FP, NM]
  10. The Vie Heureuse prize (Prix Femina) for 1919 was awarded to Les croix de bois by Roland Dorgelès, Proust's unsuccessful rival for the Prix Goncourt. [PK]
  11. Shortly after 13 November 1919 Proust had proposed an article on Flaubert's style to Jacques Rivière, in response to an article by Albert Thibaudet in La Nouvelle Revue Française on the same subject, ("Réflexions sur la littérature : Sur le style de Flaubert," 1 November 1919, p. 942-953): "If it would be agreeable to you to publish a letter by me on Flaubert's style (in response to M. Thibaudet) and on the defective methods by which we judge great writers in general, I could write a very short article or a note (CP 03950; Kolb, XVIII, no. 270). On 5 December Proust announces that he is working on "a long Flaubert," "this enormous Flaubert" (CP 03971; Kolb, XVIII, no. 288). On 8 or 9 December Proust sends Jacques Rivière a sixty page manuscript (CP 03971; Kolb, XVIII, no. 291) which was to appear in the NRF of 1 january 1920 under the title "À propos du 'style' de Flaubert" (p. 72-90). [CSz]
  12. Translation notes:
  13. Contributors: Nseeligschattner, Shmackinnon, Sspasevska, Yorktaylors