Home > 20th Century, French Literature, Gary, Romain, Novel > Whose mind am I in?

Whose mind am I in?

December 28, 2010 Leave a comment Go to comments

La Danse de Gengis Cohn, by Romain Gary. (English version : The Dance of Gengis Cohn).

 La Danse de Gengis Cohn is one of the few books by Romain Gary I had not read. It was written in French in 1966 and then translated in English in 1968. Two reasons led me to read it now. On the one hand, Nancy Huston recently wrote a fascinating article comparing the English and the French versions of this book and explaining Gary’s vision on translation. She says one could write a PhD thesis on the comparison between the English and French versions Gary made of some of his books. On the other hand, Myriam Anisimov, Gary’s French biographer, declared it was her favourite book by Gary. She also pointed out that this one forecast Emile Ajar’s style. I thought I had missed something there.

La Danse de Gengis Cohn is difficult to sum up. The narrator, Gengis Cohn, is a dibbuk, that is to say an evil spirit that haunt people in the Jewish tradition. Gengis Cohn is currently haunting the subconscious of Schatz, the former SS officer who shot him. Here is how Schatz sees him:

Je porte un manteau noir très long, par dessus mon pyjama rayé et, sur le manteau, côté coeur, l’étoile jaune réglementaire. Je suis, je le sais, très pâle – on a beau être courageux, les mitraillettes des SS braquées sur vous et le commandement Feuer! ça vous fait tout de même quelque chose – et je suis couvert de plâtre des pieds à la tête, manteau, nez, cheveux et tout. I’m wearing a very long black coat, over my striped pyjamas, and on the coat, on the side of the heart, the prescribed yellow star. I am, I am aware of that, very pale – you can be as brave as may be, the Tommy guns of the SS pointed on you and the order ‘Feuer!’, it does do something to you – and I’m covered with plaster from head to toe, coat, nose, hair and everything.

We are in 1966, in Schatz’s office, who is now a policeman. The biggest case of his career falls down on him. Men get killed in the Forest of Geist. At the beginning of the novel, already twenty-two men have been murdered and all corpses were found naked with an ecstatic grin on their face. They died happy, after climax. Schatz quickly understands they were all murdered by an eunuch named Florian after the victims have tried to sexually satisfy a frigid woman named Lily. The second part of the novel takes place in the Forest of Geist, where Schatz, always accompanied by Cohn, is searching Florian and Lily.

The reader soon comes to understand that Florian and Lily are allegories personifying Death and Life/Humanity. In the foreword, Gary claims that this book is in the tradition of picaresque novels. I can’t tell if he has achieved his goal, I know nothing of this area of literature. (It never tempted me, but I’m open to suggestions)

I think this is the most Jewish book Gary ever wrote. It is full of yiddish words and Cohn is a former comical artist who used to perform a one man show in a cabaret in Warsaw named the Schwarze Schickse. The way Cohn colonizes Schatz’s mind is truly hilarious. Gary is usually a funny writer but this is pure black humour. For example, Schatz never uses soap because you never know who is in it! (on ne sait jamais qui est dedans!)

A word about the names. Schatz is a love word in German, like darling or sweetheart. So when Cohn calls him Schatzchen, it is as if he called him Sweetie. Geist means ‘spirit’ or ‘ghost’. The Forest of Geist is at the same time the forest of dead people – slaughters happened there – and the forest of the human mind. The Forest of Geist is the subconscious of humanity. It is located near a village named Licht, which means Light. It is probably a reference to the century of the Enlightenment and to Goethe’s last words ‘Mehr Licht’, (More light).

The substance of the book is triple. The first point is to talk about the Holocaust. Gary lost relatives in camps and this book was written just after a visit to Warsaw with Jean Seberg. Nancy Huston explains in her article that Gary would have fainted during this visit and remained unconscious during three hours. This book was a necessity for him as he was haunted by the Holocaust, as a Jewish and as a humanist. This novel is an exorcism for him. Sometimes, he intervenes in the novel, like when he says:

Ma place était là-bas, avec eux. C’est curieux: il y a des Juifs qui mourront avec le sentiment d’avoir échappé à la mort. My place was there, with them. It’s strange: some Jewish people will die under the impression they have escaped to death.

Through Gengis Cohn, he questions what happened and how humanity and society cope with it. It was written in 1966 and the subject had been a taboo in France. Gary chose to have Cohn haunting a former SS but he could have chosen a Gestapo member instead.

Which leads us to the second big idea of the book. Gary struggled to understand how humanity created La Joconde and Botticelli’s paintings as well as gaz chambers. This issue is in the background of his whole work: how Humanity includes inhumanity.

On peut être un salopard et goûter la poésie. One can be a scoundrel and appreciate poetry.

He was also convinced that humanity had yet to be created, that it is an ideal that we, human, haven’t reached yet.

 And the third underlying question is how artists manage to create beauty from the horror, like Picasso with Guernica or Goya with The Disasters of War, for example. Here are Lily and Florian talking:

– Qu’est-ce qu’il est venu faire dans le Ghetto de Varsovie?- Oublier ma chérie. Il en fera sûrement un livre, c’est leur façon de se débarrasser de ce qui les gêne.- Il est mignon.

– Mais puisque je te dis que c’est un écrivain, ma chérie. Ils s’en tirent toujours avec un livre.

“What’s he come to the Warsaw ghetto for?“Blood and tears, luv. He’s looking for material.”“In such a filthy place?”

“That’s nothing compared to his subconscious, peach. A writer’s subconscious is one of the filthiest places there are: as a matter of fact, you can find the whole world there.”

“Phui!”

“I know. Writers are born shit-eaters, luv, then they use the filth, the horror, and the shame they’ve eaten to present you with some more literature, peach.”

The English quote comes from the English version of the book. That’s why it is not the exact translation of the French quote. (If anyone is interested by the literal translation, please ask in the comments, I’ll translate it). It’s also more aggressive.

In the end, the reader wonders where he is. Are Schatz and Cohn haunting a writer’s mind, which is in fact that Forest of Geist?

 The Dance of Gengis Cohn is not my favourite novel by Gary. The idea of a Jewish dibbuk haunting the mind of the SS who killed him and playing him funny tricks is good. The thoughts on creation are interesting. However, I was not convinced by the form of the novel. It is full of life, despite the depressing theme. It is a firework, an explosion of words, ideas, images, references. It would have needed editing. I lost his train of thoughts and would have appreciated a more orderly thinking.

 For those who have never read Gary, I don’t think it’s a good way to start with his work. You need to know his way of thinking to fully appreciate it. La Danse de Gengis Cohn is for fans only.

 A last word about the quotes. I translated all the quotes, except for the last one. I translated literally, which is a betrayal to Gary’s vision on translations. Indeed, he used to adapt his work to his Anglophone public. He used to modify the cultural French references to American ones in the English versions. His point was to have his public understand what he wanted to say. As he liked to hide serious issues under jokes – witz in yiddish – and as he knew each culture has his own comical references, he wanted to adapt. He thought HE had to adapt, not the reader, aware as he was, that humanity is diversity.

  1. December 29, 2010 at 3:08 am

    I like the comment about the soap.

    Sometimes it’s just necessary, isn’t it, to read the book and try to get a sense of what others are talking about. In this case the opening paragraph explains just what led you to this book.

    For picaresque: Moll Flanders

    Like

    • December 29, 2010 at 9:22 am

      The way Cohn takes possession of Schatz’s mind and makes him say cynical and spot on comments in the middle of a very serious conversation is really funny.

      I like when other bloggers explain why they chose to read this particular book at this specific moment. The reviews are more personal and reading is something personal. (well, at least when it’s a hobby). This book has been sitting on the shelf for years, it never really appealed to me. See, I was right, I didn’t enjoy it. But I’m glad I’ve read it anyway.

      I’ll look at Moll Flanders. Have you read it ?

      Like

  2. December 29, 2010 at 9:00 am

    This sounds extremely intriguing, I would maybe not like it as such but I am sure it’s fascinating and worth looking into, trying to solve the mystery of the symbolism and allusions. At one moment your review reminded me of Francine Prose’s Guided Tours of Hell. Have you read it?

    Like

    • December 29, 2010 at 9:40 am

      It is full of literary references, mostly French ones. It could be funny to see which corresponding Anglophone references he picked up when he translated the book in English. Actually, I noted a book I didn’t know and which looks intriguing. It’s Les grands cimetières sous la lune by Georges Bernanos. It’s a testimony on the Spanish Civil War. I’ve never read Bernanos. Have you?
      And yes, you could spend some time trying to dig out all the symbolism and allusions.

      This makes me think the trees of the Forest of Geist may be books or art masterpieces.

      I’ve never read Francine Prose. I see Guided Tours of Hell are short stories. On the same theme, have you read Annie Proulx ? I’ve Always Loved This Place and Swamp Mischief are two short stories whose setting is hell. In the first one, the Devil wants to redecorate Hell, since it’s not frightening enough anymore, considering what the earth has become. In the second one, the Devil gets bored and decides to resurect pterodactyls to ‘help’ an ornithologist. It’s hilarious. I’ve reviewed them, if your interested.

      Like

      • December 29, 2010 at 10:48 am

        No, I haven’t read Annie Proulx so far. I was actually tempted to include Bernanos in my read along… I got a few of his books… Not read yet but I’d like to. He is often mentioned together with Mauriac as the two most important French Catholic writers… Les grands cimetières sous la lune seems not very accomplished style wise, that’s why I was reluctant. Yesterday I realized that I could have included Sylvie Germain. I ordered Magnus. Did you read her? My father read all of her books and was quite shaken due to the references to the war in Algeria. He fought there for three years. Unpleasant. He never really recovered.

        Like

        • December 29, 2010 at 11:14 am

          I won’t be able to browse through the Bernanos before buying it, I’m afraid. I don’t think I could find it in a bookstore.
          I’ve read (and reviewed) L’Inaperçu. I tried to read Nuit d’Ambre but abandoned it. Not my cup of tea, though I admit she has a style.
          Magnus is her most famous work, apparently.
          I think the dirty war in Algeria is THE remaining taboo in France. My mom was just telling me this week-end how men came back and said “Don’t ask, I won’t tell” She was wondering if it was spontaneous or if they were given orders to shut up. Have you read Lettres d’amour d’un soldat de 20 ans by Jacques Higelin? It’s the letters he wrote when he was a soldier in Algeria. I remember they were beautiful, but I was younger when I read them.

          Like

  3. December 29, 2010 at 11:39 am

    No, I haven’t read it. My father couldn’t talk about and didn’t for years. I don’t think they were forbidden. He was just too young to grasp what had happened plus he saw awful things. He was 18 when he had to go. After one year there he was hoping to be killed but he got out of it, leaving his best friends behind. He definitely had post-traumatic strees syndrome but at the time you were a sissy if you complained so he didn’t. He still has nightmares. The dirtiest thing (apart from it being a truly nasty war what with the torturing on BOTH sides) was that France didn’t officially call it a war. How are supposed to talk about somethinng that didn’t exist, sort of. On the other hand soldiers coming out of every war before Vietnam didn’t want to talk about it. They didn’t want the war in their daily lives. Vietnam was brought into the lives of everyone through TV.

    Like

  4. December 11, 2011 at 7:04 pm

    Curious about Romain Gary, read Litlove’s entry here
    http://litlove.wordpress.com/2011/12/11/2212/

    Like

  1. March 26, 2014 at 11:14 pm

I love to hear your thoughts, thanks for commenting. Comments in French are welcome

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: