Showing posts with label Simenon. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Simenon. Show all posts

Thursday, 18 February 2016

Stoneburgh Spy Campus (Part 7): Criminal Psychogeography and Sexual Blackmail.

‘The French say there’s only one good thing to come out of Belgium and that’s the train to Paris.’
There was a ripple of appreciative laughter.
That was the opening salvo launched by Professor Hans-Jürgen Weissener (Stoneburgh Military Academy’s senior lecturer on politico-criminalistics) as I slipped into the lecture theatre with other latecomers and sought an empty seat at the rear of the aisle.
I observed that the lecture was well attended by top brass from Chatham House, supported by Intelligence specialists from associated Defence Staff Colleges and the Royal United Services Institute, who’d wedged in behind our NIGs (New Intake Group); it is a long-standing tradition that the IOC (Intelligence Operations Course) of their first semester kicks off with Weissener’s keynote address.
‘Consider this. Whether it’s Brussels or Liège or Molenbeek, from Zeebrugge to the Ardennes a comatose officialdom is perceived as tolerating a haven for paedophilia and child procuration in high places . . .  in other words – for those initiates new to the arcana of countersubversion operations – this host country, in which Nato and the European Union have each planted their strategic headquarters, grants hostile intelligence services the optimum conditions needful for their ideal hunting grounds productive of subornation and sexual blackmail . . .  specifically, the setting of honey-traps to ensnare corruptible prominent public officials privy to the secrets of the defence of the West.’
The darkened auditorium had grown silent. Inwardly, I registered a twinge of apprehension as I became aware that a decidedly unsavoury topic was to be essayed, which, to my certain knowledge, the professor had not hitherto broached for the IOC curriculum. I feared a challenge from the floor, and suddenly felt compelled to continue recording in my notebook his dark thoughts verbatim.



Necessity has no law.

And, yes, you’re right, I was thereby breaking the Chatham House Rule but, in my view, in this case, Necessitas non habet legem . . .
‘At such a grim prospect, it is our duty to reacquaint ourselves with the fundamentals of the Psychogeography of Espionage . . . because the dedicated agent in search of treachery would be wise to seek out those raffish haunts where the unwary rub shoulders with the demimonde: cafés, cocktail lounges, pubs, night clubs, private members’ drinking dens, shady second-rate hotels, Turkish baths, massage parlours, even the theatre crush bar . . . particularly the crush bar* . . .  since it is precisely at these places the targets of the hostiles are known to be stalked.’


Blackmailers’ tawdry haunts.
 
A safety-light on the dais glinted on the professor’s spectacles so we could not see his eyes.


Sybaritic Temptations on the Cheating Side of Town.

‘And don’t let us pretend we are unaware of the likely characteristics of the person of interest destined for an undercover sting. An embassy aide is invariably the most vulnerable candidate . . . from chargés d’affaires and junior attachés and cipher clerks to diplomatic couriers and the lower levels of office functionary, these are the opposition targets on our watch list – sheltered by the confidentiality of the diplomatic pouch – whose night-time pleasure-grounds secretly harbour the illicit activities that are their undoing.
‘Their own veniality is their downfall – and here’s a strange thing – there is an almost laughable predictability in the manner in which old hands in the diplomatic game will induct a new arrival – in his first foreign posting – with the customary guided tour of notorious fleshpots known for decades to generations of agents as a fledgling’s rite of passage on the Cheating Side of Town.
‘Few lines of enquiry are more fruitful than immersion in such a promising psychogeography, with the additional proviso that inclusion as a professed insider on the guest-lists of exclusive private parties – not to say orgiastic wild parties [nervous laughter] – will advance an agent’s penetration of a target’s private life more than any imposture as an habitué of louche nightspots ever will . . . soused or sober.’
There was a murmur of approval from the ranks. Any suggestion of a bar bill written off on expenses was reason enough for the half-attentive, drill-weary NIGs to snap alert and punch the air.



Party-goers with Outré Predilections.

Professor Weissener paused only to draw breath – and draw water from a carafe – before, undiscomposed, he sped on.
‘But if – as psychogeographers – we are to seek today for typical sites of such sexual predation, to uncover the hidden nexus between hostile agents and the emissaries of political power, then, in all candour, I must direct you to look at those monuments to anonymity built in the interwar years . . . cities-within-cities . . . I speak, of course, of the urban mansion blocks so fashionable in the 1930s – complexes of over one thousand self-contained apartments – built on the scale of ocean-going liners . . . and, like such luxury cruise ships – composed, as they are, of state rooms and steerage – these mammoth blocks of flats continue to afford infinite opportunities for clandestine pleasure-seekers to cross, unnoticed, the class divide and – figuratively speaking – mingle with the upper and the lower decks.’
The professor was now speaking without notes and had evidently hit his stride.
‘Coming nearer to our own day and current target locations I can find no better example than the monolithic Thames-side mansion blocks of London SW1. [Two visiting VIPs muttered with distinct unease.] Actors, playwrights, novelists, journalists, civil servants, peers, members of parliaments, call girls – and, indeed, certain intelligence personnel and nomenklatura from both sides of the Iron Curtain – have made these fortress-like communal dwelling places their home, addresses often known by us to be a magnet for discreet party-goers of more outré predilections, as well as politicians taking lodgings convenient for late-night sittings at Westminster . . . not to mention their convenience for nocturnal assignations involving certain other unnameable late-night recumbent attitudes.’ [Cue ill-repressed sniggers from the young NIGs.]
A brass hat harrumphed, and Colonel Rees-Sholter (director of T-FECS, the Task-Force for European Co-operation and Security) blew his nose with a theatrical flourish that made his displeasure unmistakably known.
‘I have no intention to moralise, but the fact that such places once harboured the traitor Lord Haw-Haw and fascist Oswald Moseley, and boasted as tenants the goodtime girls who precipitated the scandals that brought down Profumo – our Secretary of State for War, no less – is an illustration analogous to the evident threats our security services must confront in continental Europe.’
An eager young cadet raised his hand with the alacrity of a swot.
‘Wasn’t John Vassall – the naval spy, sir, who worked for the Soviets – arrested in that block at Apartment 807?’
‘Lamentably, that is correct, and my regret is intensified by the thought that in the very heart of London’s elite, expertly concealed in a secret drawer, was found not only a Praktina document-copying camera but a subminiature Minox with exposed 35mm cassettes recording over one-hundred-and-seventy classified Admiralty and Nato documents . . . the simple truth being that this clerical grade civil servant, who lived in high style on a modest pay rate while unaccountably possessed of wardrobes of bespoke Savile Row suits and made-to-measure gentleman’s silk shirts, had been sexually compromised by a Soviet provocateur when on the staff – may I remind you – of the Naval Attaché at the British embassy in Moscow. A classic blackmail fit-up of drunken revels with our dupe drugged and stripped and photographed in the naked embraces of homo-eroticists hired by the KGB.’
Another thunderous harrumph from a VIP was a hint with a crowbar that the professor studiously ignored.


London’s Fortress of Anonymity 1938
‘State rooms and steerage.’

Potential for Extortion in Continental Europe. 

‘So,’ Weissener continued grimly, ‘at a time of extraordinary upheaval in continental Europe and the prospect of mass movements of DPs [displaced persons], not unlike the crises of refugees and human trafficking at the close of two world wars, it can be here recorded as a fact of immense significance that such turbulent anarchic conditions are charged with the potential to sustain the unrestrained abuse of power, conditions which could become – if indeed they have not already become – the forcing-ground for child abduction and sex-slave rings and prostitution and extortion on a scale unseen since the first half of the last century.
There is no more insidious peril, in my own view, than that now menacing Europe’s supranational administrative institutions – located in the heartland of Belgium – and there is no more striking exemplification of that perilous state than the continuing historic recurrence of disturbingly characteristic crime scenes that define a unique psychogeography, a gravitational attraction that has warped a culture to contemplate unimaginable acts of sexual depravity, which over time have become symptomatic of a troubled nation . . . a nation tainted by multiple child kidnappings and the rape, torture, incarceration and serial murder of abducted young girls, a scandal of blackmail and sordid cover-ups allegedly implicating officials of the most senior rank at the highest levels of pan-European governance, judiciary and the political class.’
A brooding silence had descended on the gathering and Colonel Rees-Sholter** rose abruptly – his face had darkened, I noticed – and he withdrew hurriedly by the rear exit.


‘. . . attracts them with the prospect of gaudy aperitifs and pastries.’

‘Institutionalised’ Tolerance of the Molestation of Underage Girls.

Professor Weissener, Stoneburgh Academy’s most respected authority on Soviet counter-espionage and subversion, riffled through his notes to the final page.
‘That such all-pervading corruption of the sexually-compromised can be exploited by adversaries hostile to Europe’s democratic rule of law is a demonstrable fact, as my earlier cited cases indicate, but allow me to call your attention to some past occurrences of crime black spots – in this case those crime scenes re-emergent in the city of Liège that may be seen to inform the recurrences in the national psyche I refer to.’
Professor Weissener fixed his eye pointedly on Rees-Sholter’s empty chair and his mouth tightened with a bitter resolve.
‘This is no place to provoke controversy but I intend to do no more than view the facts. Facts that reveal what I would call a civic society’s “institutionalised” tolerance of the molestation of underage girls, dating back almost a century.
‘And may I say I speak on the incontestable authority of a venerated master criminologist, Nobel Prize nominee, and member of Brussels’s Royal Academy of French Language and Literature, who in his recollections of his schooldays writes quite nonchalantly about the seduction of underage schoolgirls in the parish of Saint-Pholien in the Outremeuse district of Liège at the time of the First World War.
‘As a schoolboy, he was acquainted with a sinister matricidal, homicidal second-hand bookseller, ponce and blackmailer, under the protection of the kommandantur of the occupying Germans, who bought school textbooks from the schoolboy for resale to fellow pupils. This bookseller . . .  

. . . used to stop young girls in the street and take them into his shop with its shutters closed . . . I can still hear the hoarse voice of a little girl, the daughter of a fruit and vegetable merchant: ‘You shouldn’t have let it happen!’ [With the response.] ‘He would have denounced me to the Germans . . .’ [At the same time in Liège, a pimp known to this memoirist . . .  while renting] a small pied-à-terre not far from the Girls Middle School, looks out for the pupils at the exit and attracts them with the prospect of gaudy aperitifs and pastries.
‘Later, in the early 1920s, the German mark catastrophically falls, in the “dizzy period” of hyperinflation when, as this informant remembers, “you counted marks in millions and billions.”
‘The exchange rate of the mark and franc meant Belgians crossing the border on the “Swindlers’ trains” to Cologne on wild shopping sprees saw “the prices changed every hour while you shopped . . .”
The memoirist is unjudgemental when he records . . .

And the women! . . . And the lads who looked for you, near the [railway] stations, to introduce you to their little sister! [From this eminent Belgian writer there are no more agonies of exculpation than . . . ] Should we seek an explanation in the times? Are there periods of more intense ferment or moments when unhealthy trends are occurring? . . . It was a time, please remember, when they arrested all the pupils in a secondary school because a little girl was dead, a little girl who had been taken off somewhere by her brother with some boys and used by them all as a source of experiences . . . a time when not a day passed without the suicide of an adolescent . . . . Under the [German] occupation, had the [bookseller] been able to satisfy without fear his passion for not yet pubescent girls?. . . satisfying his libido . . . in the back of the shop . . .  [Under the occupation] they taught us to cheat, swindle and lie . . . they taught us to take advantage of shady corners . . . 
Weissener unfolded a large handkerchief and, as he mopped his brow, surreptitiously wiped a tear from his eye. As I have mentioned in my earlier despatches, the professor was formerly an agent for the German Federal Intelligence Service, and he had once told me his father’s family had lost a fortune in savings in the disastrous crash of devalued currency that followed the First World War.

‘Should we seek an explanation in the times?
Are there periods of more intense ferment . . .’ 

A Little White Slave Trading.

‘So, in my own view,’ the professor’s voice was hoarse with suppressed emotion, ‘the conclusion is irresistible. Morally numbed by the decadence of post-war licentiousness, this Belgian Nobel Prize nominee as a witness to Belgian history is revealed as cooly unjudgemental in his regard for his friend, the pimp. For, as he concedes, the pimp in those amoral times was in the business of “a little white slave trading” and “capable of persuading a sentimental young girl to take a ship for the Americas . . . when all is said and done it’s all horribly banal.” ’
The safety light on the dais began to flicker urgently, and I saw the colonel making a ‘cut-throat’ gesture through the glass panel of the exit door. Weissener grimaced.
‘I am reminded that my allotted time is running away, so I shall hastily “fast forward” to the present day to ask the abrupt question, a question I continue to ask myself: “Is it true that there are, as our Belgian informant reminds us, unhealthy trends persisting that manifest themselves in the locus of a criminal psychogeography?*** And should we map those recurrences as an aid to our operations in counter-subversion?” You, as cautious and practical thinkers, will I am certain pursue the answer to this quandary calmly and dispassionately . . . for the persistence of a collective memory of degenerate criminality is one that warrants the most profound and extended study.

‘And I am uttering no special pleading with the false quantity of a shallow poignancy when I tell you now that, just a decade ago, in Liège, not more than a kilometer away, across the Meuse, from the church of Saint-Pholien – the neighbourhood of our Belgian belle-lettrist’s unprincipled reminiscences of prewar condoned child molestation – the bodies of two young schoolgirls no older than ten were discovered in a storm drain, raped and strangled. 
   ‘Might I add, I have it on good authority that Belgians are rated the worst drivers in Europe. By extension, then, defiance of convention may well come easily to them. (Nervous laughter from the floor.)
‘As I outlined at the beginning of my address, our purpose as psychogeographers and criminal profilers today is to continue to identify and monitor such urban sites of sexual predation and blackmail, to uncover the hidden nexus between hostiles and their potential victims in our pursuance of unconditionally denying predators the least opportunity for the vile exploitation of female sexual subjugation.’

At which point Professor Weissener, clearly keyed up by his distressing subject matter, bowed and sat down to be greeted with a cautious scattering of applause.

Stolen childhoods . . . adult toys from
Au Printemps Jouets 1916

The Stoneburgh Rule.

Only afterwards did I have certain reservations in defying the Stoneburgh Rule of Non-Disclosure with my intention to reproduce those unspoken passages of the professor’s notes that he had earlier asked me, as an NRG (Non Regular Personnel), to study for considerations of conformance to propriety, compassion and good taste.
  On the penultimate page of his lecture notes, he wrote: ‘When you consider that the great-grandfather of the brother-in-law of Her Majesty the present Queen photographed prepubescent schoolgirls covertly in Kensington, catching them unawares with his sly 45-degree camera, and the implications of the legitimacy of his possessing an estimated 30,000 images, some got with dubious motive, I am 
❚❚❚❚❚ ❚❚❚❚ ❚❚❚❚❚ ❚❚❚❚ . . . ’ [Redacted by SMA webmaster.]

For Professor Weissener’s recent increasingly jaundiced views on the political convulsions in continental Europe, see: 
http://catherineeisnerfrance.blogspot.co.uk/2016/01/stoneburgh-spy-campus-bar-please-burn.html



STOP-PRESS 28.02.2016 Professor Weissener has just telephoned me with news that London’s Sunday Times has today exposed the BND (Germany’s equivalent of MI6, their Federal Intelligence Service the Bundesnachrichtendienst) for placing one of Britain’s Privy Councillors (and the EU’s former foreign policy chief) under electronic surveillance. ‘Beware,’ Weissener cautions, ‘have a care when you throw out the trash; the snoops are delving into every garbage bin.’

STOP-PRESS 19.09.20
The Times reports Former British Diplomat Accused of Spying in Brussels: Belgium’s State Security Service warned of the threat stemming from foreign powers in the areas of interference and espionage. The report stated that because Belgium was home to both Nato’s headquarters and the EU ‘the scale of the threat is disproportionately big for a small country of barely 30,000 square kilometres and 11.5 million inhabitants.’



* A Bad Case  (2015), page 95, Inducement, see below . . . 
** Sister Morphine (2008), page 219, Red Coffee. A description of an encounter with Rees-Sholter is a candid snapshot: The colonel’s complexion was bibulous. The eyes that met and challenged hers were fierce and violet-blue but, fortunately, he preferred excessively young women so they got straight down to essentials brusquely. See below . . .
*** This reputation as a ‘locus of a criminal psychogeography‘ is actually reaffirmed by a recent Belgian-French ‘Simenonesque’ crime movie set in the environs of Liège, La Fille Inconnue (2016), directed by the Dardenne brothers, in which a Liégeois procures a teenaged girl, trafficked in Liège as a prostitute, to perform fellatio on his elderly father, a resident of a care home. So, evidently, even one hundred years after the events described by our Belgian belle-lettrist, in this particular quarter we sense there is no departure from a long-established pattern of everyday moral degradation.
  
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Catherine Eisner believes passionately in plot-driven suspense fiction, a devotion to literary craft that draws on studies in psychoanalytical criminology and psychoactive pharmacology to explore the dark side of motivation, and ignite plot twists with unexpected outcomes. 
see Eisner’s Sister Morphine (2008)

Friday, 1 August 2014

The Irreconcilable Sententiousness of Libertine Old Masters . . .

In the collected works of Anton Chekhov the short story, Imeniny (The Name-Day Party), is often singled out as a remarkably faithful portrait of a pregnant woman: the highs and lows of a loyal, sensitive wife betrayed by a heedless, self-regarding husband.

However . . . never mind that this tale has been described by Chekhovian scholars as a most profound ‘tour de force’ for his account of the psychopathology of the late stages of the third trimester – the discomfort, the hypersensitivity, the gravid leadenness – we should first remember that Dr. Anton Pavlovich Chekhov was a male clinician and even his talent for empathetic vraisemblance had obvious boundaries.

On the other hand, his profound empathy cannot be doubted in the shadow-twin of this story, Pripadok (An Attack of Nerves), both published in the same year . . . significantly, Year Zero, as defined by Nietzsche’s Umwerthung aller Werthe (Revaluation of All Values) of 1888.

Compare the two. It’s a striking contrast, as though one story has prompted the other. In the former, the fallow connubial bed cannot excuse the stirrings of infidelity in a swaggering indifferent husband; in the latter, a virginal young law student, Vassilyev, reluctantly on a night’s carouse with two comrades intent on inducting him into the ‘pleasures’ of brothels, experiences a moral crisis, and asks: ‘Is the debauching of prostitutes not a crime? Is it not as great an evil as slave-owning, rape or murder?’  

With strict adherence to his anti-pedagogic method, Chekhov follows his own advice and asked the questions without seeking answers to them: his stories thence characteristically become exercises in propositional logic strewn with premises but deficient of any conclusions.

In my novel, D-r Tchékhov, Detektiv, I seek mischievously  to correct this tendency towards moral ambivalence with the syllogistic reasoning of my conflicted antihero sometimes pursued to unwelcome logical proofs that appear axiomatic, see
http://catherineeisnerfrance.blogspot.co.uk/2011/10/d-r-tchekhov-detektiv-long-lost-novel.html
Tchékhov paid the ferriage for the rivercrossing and the survey party embarked, stumbling in the unearthly stealing polar dusk.
   ‘There is no hurry,’ Anton remarked breezily, as the ferryman took his arm. ‘Charon waits for all!’
   A putrid smell arose as the waves sucked at the stern ; for the river had been turbulent in recent months and, as it flowed along, like a ferocious animal, it gnawed and ate away the fast-ice clutching the banks.
   Small chunks of ice rapped on the hull. Shuddering as the northerly shook him by the throat, Anton clenched the forward-rail and searched the midafternoon murk for a closing shore.
   (‘Finita la commedia!’ his heart cried, ‘and end this burdensome daylong travail.’)
   A wreath entwined with withered leaves of laurel was sucked by on the swirling current. A melancholy syllogism occurred to him :
Man is composed of 60% water ;
water strives to seek its own level ; 
60% of a man’s soul desires to plunge at once over the side of a ferry boat.

Also, for more probings into this field of enquiry, see the contradictions hitherto unremarked in the ‘classic prose’ of an eminent English syllogistic rationalist at this link:
http://catherineeisnerfrance.blogspot.co.uk/2012_04_01_archive.html


Do As I Say. Not As I Do.

So lately I’ve found Chekhov’s abbreviated propositional method has grown tiresome and his ‘classic prose’ is now seen, to my jaundiced eye, to express a sort of inverted sententiousness.

I invite you, therefore, to examine closely the following passage from Chekhov’s An Attack of Nerves and the additional quotations that follow; with the challenge that you, too, reader-of-literary-old-masters, should consider a revaluation of values.
[Vassilyev thought] ‘. . . What is the use of their humanity, their medicine, their painting? The science, art, and lofty sentiments of these soul-destroyers remind me of [the two] brigands [who] murdered a beggar in a forest . . . After murdering a man, they came out of the forest in the firm conviction that they were [still observing a holy fast]. In the same way [these student comrades], after buying women, go their way imagining that they are artists and men of science. . . .’ 
    ‘Listen!’ he said sharply and angrily. ‘Why do you come here? Is it possible you don't understand how horrible it is? Your medical books tell you that every one of these women dies prematurely of consumption or something; art tells you that morally they are dead even earlier. Every one of them dies because she has in her time to entertain five hundred men on an average, let us say. Each one of them is killed by five hundred men. You are among those five hundred! If each of you in the course of your lives visits [brothels] two hundred and fifty times, it follows that one woman is killed for every two of you! Can’t you understand that? Isn't it horrible to murder, two of you, three of you, five of you, a foolish, hungry woman! . . .’ 
Two years earlier (1886), one should recall, Chekhov wrote a cautionary letter to his brother Nikolai reprimanding him for his pleasure-seeking in Moscow’s lower depths, counselling him to become a more cultured person since he had within him the talent to be at ease in the company of ‘educated people . . . Talent has brought you into such a circle, you belong to it, but … you are drawn away from it, and you vacillate between cultured people and [drinking cronies] . . .’ Anton implores Nikolai to ‘smash the vodka bottle . . .’

Anton continues to moralise with self-referential gravity on the duties of a cultured artist.
They seek as far as possible to restrain and ennoble the sexual instinct . . . What they want in a woman is not a bed-fellow … They want especially, if they are artists, freshness, elegance, humanity, the capacity for motherhood . . .  For they want mens sana in corpore sano.

Mens sana in corpore sano? Did Anton Chekhov truly believe that for a supreme artist the ennobling of the sexual instinct was an attainable ideal? Certainly, the innumerable amatory adventures – including his own – of so many old masters do not bear close scrutiny in support of his proposition.


Chekhov’s Formula for Extrapolating the Mortality of Fallen Women. 

According to a Los Angeles Times reviewer, Georges Simenon created a scandale à la mode by telling two different interviewers that from age 13 he had slept with 10,000 women, of whom 8,000 were prostitutes. By applying Chekhov’s equation, we can calculate that Simenon, the master of homicidal psychopathology, had himself, before his death aged 86, killed at least sixteen women.


Chekhov expresses his computation thus: ‘If each of you in the course of your lives visits [brothels] two hundred and fifty times, it follows that one woman is killed for every two of you!’

On this sensitive matter, a Chekhov aficionado states in the London Guardian daily of 1 March 2013: 

It starts in 1873, when the teenage Chekhov visited a brothel in his home town of Taganrog and continues until 1898 when his relationship with the actress Olga Knipper began . . . The picture that emerges is of a man who, over the course of a couple of decades, enjoyed at least two-dozen love affairs of varying intensity – some extremely passionate, some casual, some lasting many years, and some that were clearly going on simultaneously – and who, it’s also clear from his letters, continued to be a regular visitor to brothels in Russia and elsewhere in Europe.

I am reminded of this confraternity of literary men consecrated to unswerving faith in the undemanding tenets of their irreconcilable sententiousness when I attended a wedding recently and heard from the altar, at the bridegroom’s request, a recitation of Siempre (‘Always’) by Pablo Neruda.

I am not jealous
of what came before me.

Come with a man
on your shoulders,
come with a hundred men in your hair,

come with a thousand men between your breasts and your feet,

This boast invites a challenge, coming as it does from an arch philanderer and from a husband who in pursuit of other women abandoned an inconvenient wife and their ailing infant daughter, a choice of moral worth little different from that of Rainer Maria Rilke whose daughter was similarly abandoned before the age of one.

More than this, these proponents of doublethink, propagating their creed of irreconcilable sententiousness, appear to give little thought to the consequences of their libertinage.

As it is, 125 years have elapsed since Chekhov first posited his theory of venereal disease in terms of quantifiable culpability, and medical research into its incidence and prevention has advanced apace. Nevertheless, screening in Great Britain in the last decade suggests that as many as one in 10 sexually active men has the sexually transmitted infection Chlamydia without knowing it. The figures are in line with similar studies of sexually active young women, which indicate that one in 10 also has the infection without knowing it. 


‘Man Wants Woman! Every Man Wants a Woman! So Natural!’

Possibly One in 10 has the infection without knowing it. It would follow, then, that with the level of promiscuity that Neruda embraces in his magnanimous welcome to the 1,100 lovers of the Love-of-His-Life (‘Bring them all to where I am waiting for you . . .’) over one hundred of them, and undoubtedly his inamorata, will be infected.

Cervical smear showing Chlamydia trachomatis in the vacuoles. 

Mens sana in corpore sano? To return to first principles and the irreconcilability of sententiousness attendant on the licentiousness of old masters. Question. Were the nostrums Dr Chekhov prescribed for the world swallowed merely by his adulatory readers and never dispensed to the great man himself?

Even today, controversy rages in Yalta concerning rumours of Chekhov’s predilection for prostitutes. 

In the November 22 1997 edition of the London Guardian can be read an account of an argument between a Yalta sanatorium doctor, Dr Yuri Zinenko and his wife, Valentina, a neurosurgeon: ‘Nyet! Nyet! Prostitut! Of course he visited prostitutes! Man wants Woman! Every man wants a woman! So natural!’

From a medical standpoint, the surgeon’s husband believed that Dr Chekhov’s degeneration through tuberculosis would not have stopped him: ‘His consumption was the most severe kind, but this can just make a tubercular patient more active.’

A cordon sanitaire, therefore, is better drawn over this sensitive matter, when even medico-compatriots can’t agree, aside from their separate views, as husband or wife. 


Come with a hundred men in your hair,
Come with a thousand men between your breasts.
Freetest.me Laboratory PreventX Testing-by-Mail. 
The Test is free for 16-24 year olds in the UK.
PreventX: Reduce your number of sexual partners
and avoid overlapping sexual partnerships.


[January 19 2024] The Local Government Association for England and Wales reveals that their latest analysis reports that two thirds of council areas surveyed had seen rates of gonorrhoea and syphilis increase since 2017, with 36 per cent of local authority areas also reporting significant increases in detections of chlamydia.


A Moral Undrawn.

No moral can be drawn from these musings, obviously. That would be most un-Chekhovian. 

And yet . . . many devotees have commented that in his care for others Chekhov neglected to cure himself, a point made in a sly authorial backhanded observation by a character in Nabokov’s novel The Gift: ‘I wouldn’t have been treated by Dr Chekhov for anything in the world.’

Prostitutes soliciting in Moscow in the late Twentieth Century.


Catherine Eisner believes passionately in plot-driven suspense fiction, a devotion to literary craft that draws on studies in psychoanalytical criminology and psychoactive pharmacology to explore the dark side of motivation, and ignite plot twists with unexpected outcomes. Within these disciplines Eisner’s fictions seek to explore variant literary forms derived from psychotherapy and criminology to trace the traumas of characters in extremis. Compulsive recurring sub-themes in her narratives examine sibling rivalry, rivalrous cousinhood, pathological imposture, financial chicanery, and the effects of non-familial male pheromones on pubescence, 
see Eisner’s Sister Morphine (2008)
http://catherineeisnerfrance.blogspot.co.uk/2011/09/sister-morphine.html
and Listen Close to Me (2011)
http://catherineeisnerfrance.blogspot.co.uk/2011/09/published-this-autumn-listen-close-to.html 
and A Bad Case (2015)