Rachel Hope Cleves: Unspeakable; A Life Beyond Sexual Morality

This was a very strange and disturbing book, both to read and even more so to comment upon. From the start I liked the authorial reflections which pepper the work. It was as if she was thinking out loud on paper although the thoughts are considered and reflective. The whole book, in one sense, is a meditation on the age-old question of the dichotomy of the artist and his/her art but, rightly and understandably, even at the very end, there are no glib answers given – perhaps because there cannot be.

I do not think, and neither I think, does the author, that Douglas was in any sense a ‘major’ writer – it seems he wrote a couple of pretty fine ‘travel’ books but he is more interesting for who he was, what he did and the effect that he had on people; I found it fascinating to see how many people were almost seduced by him as a person – including Elizabeth David; but they were, it seems, seduced knowing who and what he and his proclivities were. He undoubtedly had a remarkable charisma (are there any films of him?) but I suspect he will always, necessarily, be as much know as for what he did and with whom as for anything he wrote. I think too that his semi-aristocratic background with the confidence to be able to say ‘to hell with the rest of the world’ had an interesting part to play and that Douglas feel happy ploughing his own furrow. I do not think, after reading this, that he was like, say Aleister Crowley who, it seemed made a much more conscious decision to be ‘wicked’. But how would things be, and how would he be regarded now if he was a fine and significant a writer as Lawrence? It’s fascinating to read about the relationship and encounters between Douglas and (D.H.) Lawrence – who, tbh comes across as a bit of an a***hole.

changed and the judgements embedded in those words – pederast and pedophile. In one way they are the same but in another there is a vast difference. One a criminal, indulging in beyond-the-pale acts, exploiting the vulnerable and it being a psychology and an illness as opposed to the other as, to a degree, being part of a noble educational tradition with historical and intellectual scaffolding that could be beneficial for all.

The author said that the voices of the boys that could be read, and which she had read were the most interesting and it would have been interesting of there had been more (any?) direct quotation. But I wonder if she made a decision not to do that as it could be seen as justifying what Douglas did which is not possible today. But this is actually very nuanced and the author was very (painfully?) aware of this and this was clearest in the last two chapters of the book – a post-life conclusion? The judgement was impressive and very thoughtfully nuanced though.

But it was disturbing that I had only recently seen the Netflix Jimmy Saville documentary just before I read this.