Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

Invisible Ink: No 222 - Death by snobbery

 

Christopher Fowler
Friday 02 May 2014 08:28 EDT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

This is the first time I’ve revisited an author, after discovering there’s yet another reason why good writing can vanish. When I first mentioned J B Priestley, most of his novels were out of print. Now they’re returning in new editions, accompanied by fresh critical assessment. With hindsight, it appears that the writer was bullied out of print by the arrogance of the intelligentsia.

Andrew Marr said that Priestley was “once too much everywhere. Now he’s not anywhere enough”. The critical darlings of academia, F R Leavis, Orwell, Greene, Woolf, Waugh and co, conspired to disdain and destroy Priestley’s reputation. He was blanked by them in analyses of great 20th-century works for writing about the human condition from the ground, instead of tackling ideas at a more cerebral level. Priestley thought that novels should look to Dickens, Cervantes and Shakespeare (his social detail is extremely Dickensian) and he paid the price for commercial success. He was disrespected by authors who never had to worry about finding work; Woolf considered him “a tradesman of letters”, just as the Bloomsbury set mocked anyone who sold well.

While pejoratives for some bestsellers are often appropriate, Priestley’s victimisation was wrong. Here was a theatrical giant who helped found the National Council for Civil Liberties, a radical wartime broadcaster, and founding member of CND, who helped set up the Albany Trust counselling organisation during homosexual law reform. He was a popular and familiar figure, then, too familiar not to be dismantled. This would merely merit a historical footnote were it not for the fact that Priestley’s writing has proven durable and prescient.

Angel Pavement (1930) is the story of a genteel company upended by a new employee. The articles Mr Smeeth reads from his paper could be in today’s red tops. He is concerned that his children’s growing independence and indifference to his values will damage them. His staff are fearful and exhilarated at the thought of sudden, irrevocable change. Presenting recognisable behaviour in characters is hardly a talent to be despised, but it would be dull if that were all; it’s not, because Priestley is presenting a forensic, humane indictment of the working English under pressure from all sides. Ultimately, his decency and humanity was considered to have undermined his work, a ludicrous idea that with his victorious re-emergence is now mercifully heading for history’s dustbin, returning Angel Pavement to its rightful status as one of the greatest London novels.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in