Peter Gebhardt could be old school, which is amusing when
we consider he spent half his life turning old schools into new schools. One
way he was old school was how he lived on the telephone. The telephone is a
conversational device via which he conducted long conversations with family,
friends, and colleagues; probably also reformed individuals he watched through
the courts. I imagine this was a lifelong practice, or rather, pastime.
I
would pick up the receiver to hear the Gebhardt voice commence a dialogue that
could go for the next three or the next fifty-three minutes. He never said,
“Peter here”, or introduced himself in full, or said hello, it was straight
into it. For example: “What do you make of the Prime Minister this week?” This
was less an opportunity for me to remark on the government’s latest
misadventure than for Peter to launch forth on his newest series of mock-shock
observations and rock solid opinions. The Prime Minister, inevitably, was put in
his place.
Sometimes
I would lift the receiver only to hear Peter taking up where we left off last
week: “What you said about the Irish … Well it’s true, isn’t it? I’ve been
thinking about it,” upon which his thoughts about my thoughts would deliver and
digress in orderly manner, with me hoping to find a lacuna to add something
myself. He had a relish for clear ideas.
At
his thanksgiving service at Trinity College one of the eulogists drew attention
to Peter’s extraordinary ability to live always with the promise of a future.
He had things on the go, all the time. The future is there for us to make
something positive and concrete, whatever challenges may arise. This truth
caused me to reflect on our last phone conversations this year.
In
one call I said I was re-reading parts of Proust. I liked the back-and-forward
of his narrative, where a person or event may enter, prompting philosophy and
memories, memories that prompt deeper memories. I enjoyed Proust’s remarkable
digressions, some of them lengthening into pages, before he returned magically
to an earlier story. Peter hadn’t looked at Proust for a long time.
A
week later, next call, he alludes to Proust. I say I have been lent the recent
translation project of Christopher Prendergast & Co. That I have revisited
Swann and, not surprisingly, find many surprises that I missed when I read the
books thirty years ago. He makes vague noises about versions and how long it
all is, before switching to something he knows about, mainly his health. In
fact, his health has not been good for a while. I know when it’s really bad
because he doesn’t phone at all.
A
couple of weeks later, a phone call, and the voice of Peter intervenes on my
morning. What was that translation of Proust I was talking about? He has to read
it now. He is clearly planning for the future. Proust is something concrete, so
Proust is now part of the plan. I imagine having Proust is a good way to pass
the hours in hospital. Prendergast. Penguin Books.
Next
call is from a hospital. I know this when he starts talking about nurses,
tests, and blood. He has his people looking for that Proust set, but to no
avail. Where can he find it? ‘His people’, incidentally, are the family members
and what I always refer to as his ‘secretaries’, who run his errands, send
emails, and do everything a telephone man hasn’t got time to waste upon. He had
about five secretaries, by my count, but probably more. He was old school.
Readings, maybe. Hill of Content, if anyone, they stock the classics: talk to
Andrew or Pauline. Dymocks, if it’s in print.
A
week later, phone call, no one has Proust. So I say well you may have to buy
online. I praise James Grieve’s translation of the second volume of Proust.
Grieve is the enfant terrible of Proust translators, resident in Canberra, even
though he’s no longer an enfant and probably not terrible. This annoys Peter
even more, a controversial translator of Proust who is an Australian, and he
hasn’t got the book. Motivation is reaching fever pitch.
It
is a relief to hear that, a couple of weeks later, his secretaries have
procured the volumes and that arrival is imminent. I say to Peter he should
start with Combray, which is compact and of a piece, setting the scene. That
Combray is the narrator Marcel’s recollections of his childhood in Paris and
the north of France. That Combray includes the seriously famous passage about
dipping the madeleine cake in tea. He listens at the other end and thanks me
for all my help on the Proust project.
There
were a couple more phone calls, mainly on politics and a letter he had received
from Marie Heaney in Dublin. The news of his death came by chance from one of
his secretaries, after I had recommended some of his recent poems for
publication in Eureka Street. She wrote in an email to say Peter died on the 22nd
of July. In the days that followed I reflected on how he rang me, even when in
extremis, and what a great person he was for keeping conversation going right
to the end. I was just one of his telephone companions, though we’d had the odd
lunch, and yet he took an interest, generated new thoughts, mischievous
thoughts and creative, joked about Prime Ministers and the like, and cheered
the day. I reflected on the set of Proust he’d had ordered, at home waiting for
him to read, the next reading project, always something on the go.
This is beautiful Phillip Harvey. Thank you. Anna Gebhardt.
ReplyDeleteThanks Phillip that is a beautiful piece. Anna Gebhardt.
ReplyDelete