Intriguing book, intriguing author … but I can’t honestly claim to be entirely enthusiastic about this title.
Poet, art critic, linguist, writer, traveller, adventurer, enigma, Cendrars had a Swiss father and Scottish mother: born in Switzerland, educated in German and French, worked for several years in Russia, enlisted in the French Foreign Legion in 1914 when the Great War broke out, his real name was Frédéric Louis Sauser, and his pseudonym Blaise Cendrars is, itself, a work of art, a corruption of the French ‘braise’ (embers) and ‘cendres’ (ashes), capped off with ‘ars’ (art).
A man with a sense of humour, a man with a taste for mischief, a man who could embrace the ridiculous, and, reading this book, a man who clearly despised pomposity and pretension. He also comes across as a man who was full of himself, a man who made few efforts to repress his sense of self-importance. This was a man who may have mixed well with others, but there was an ego there, this was a man who was intent on doing things his way.
This title, “Lice”, is actually the second of an autobiographical quartet (though third to be published in English) – the first, “The Astonished Man” (“L'homme foudroyé”), published 1945, touches on his war experiences but focusses in the main on his world travels, so I chose "Lice" as I’ve been reading autobiographical works by WW1 front-line soldiers - English, German, American … and now a ‘French’ author (he enlisted in the Foreign Legion as a Swiss national, his comrades in arms were all ‘foreigners’, were not French).
And this is very much a book to be approached critically. Written in 1944-45 as France emerged from German occupation, it lacks the immediacy of memoirs kept during the First World War (or shortly after). He tells tales of his comrades (most of whom are killed), he’s unsparing about the fixations of soldiering (finding somewhere to sleep, to shit, getting enough food, and drink, and maybe sex, hating officers, never knowing what the generals will plan next, etc., etc.). There’s no glamour here, the heroics are not romanticised – they’re brutal, matter-of-fact, do what you have to to survive.
But they’re anecdotes and stories written at a distance of thirty years and in a much changed world. I didn’t get a sense of verisimilitude, it felt like reading fiction rather than being drawn into a real world. I’m not suggesting he lied about his experiences (he did actually lose an arm in combat), but I sense he padded them out, made sense of them when, in fact, there was no sense to much of what was occurring.
I’ve only read the English translation – I haven’t been able to compare it with the French original – and I can’t help feeling it has been ‘sanitised’, in places literally made sane.
And I wonder about errors – set in 1914-15, written in 1944-45, at one stage Cendrars escorts a German prisoner back for interrogation … and the translation refers to him complying with the Geneva Convention. The four Geneva Conventions didn’t come into existence until 1949, the year of my birth.
For the first sixteen years of my life I shared a house with a veteran of the First World War. My Uncle Chay wore the uniform of a Scottish regiment from day one of the war in August, 1914 until he was finally shipped back across the Channel and demobbed in 1919. He bore no animosity to the German and Turkish troops he’d fought for four years, they were just ordinary men caught up in the same war, enduring the same horrors … but wearing different uniforms. He killed them, they tried to kill him.
Chay’s body carried the physical scars of his war but he spoke little of his experiences, a few anecdotes, he never really revealed the scars to mind and memory … but in his last years he was cast adrift from reality by the grip of dementia. I’ve often wondered if four years in the Dardanelles, Palestine and the trenches of the Western Front had contributed to that decline.
And I struggle with “Lice”. Anecdotal, but how much is fictionalised? Memories are heavily edited at the best of times. Certainly the conversations Cendrars reports are far too detailed, are too precise to have been remembered for 30 years. They’re dramatised, scenes from a theatre of war. And war tends to happen quickly and suddenly, no matter how long it drags on. There’s no time to make a note of things as they’re happening.
Cendrars casts himself in the starring role – he’s a corporal, he leads his men, he creates a commando unit out of nothing, in places the account seems like a "Boy’s Own" adventure – there’s a lack of tension, a lack of terror, you don’t really absorb the exhaustion and discomfort, that sense of hanging on second by second, minute by minute.
He details the mud and the excrement and the cold and the rain and the noise and the vibrations and shocks, but it comes across as cosmetic rather than as experiential, as ‘real’ atmosphere. Was his record polished as narrative, did the translation sanitise it?
There’s humour there, there’s the sense of the ridiculous, his comrades have flaws, they’re a motley collection of men caught up in horror, trying to stay sane, not just alive.
And there’s a lot to be commended in the book – even if it is episodic, more a confection of short stories and anecdotes than a biographical work. But, for me at any rate, it didn’t quite catch and hold my attention.
[There are four autobiographical works, the third was “Planus” (“Bourlinguer”, 1948), the fourth, “Sky” (“Le Lotissement du ciel”, 1949): they explore, in the main, the author’s travels and experiences. The works appeared in English in the 1970s, translated by Nina Rootes – “Lice” was the third of the four to appear in translation, in 1973.]