When John Banville embarked on a memoir of the city that shaped his early life, his recollections began to falter. He recounts the journey that led him back to the past
Recently I spent a few nights in a New York hotel that I last stayed in a quarter of a century ago. In those days the place had a distinct mid-town Manhattan swish and flair to it, butnow it has become shabby in awaythat I find entirely congenial noTrumpery at all, with an atmosphere rather like that of one of Londons less salubrious gentlemensclubs.
I had been given what the front deskcalled a suite, which turned out to be a box-sized bedroom entirely occupied by a bed that would have accommodated seven or eight sleepers, and a tiny annex that looked like everybodys grannys parlour. When Ihad unpacked, I stepped into the bathroom, wincing away from my haggard reflection in the mirror over the handbasin, like an old-style mobster shying from a barrage of popping flash-bulbs. Just inside the door, immediately to the right, there was a narrow rifle-slit of frosted glass that must have survived from the days when the building was still liable to attack by Native American war-parties certainly it served no contemporary function. As soon as I set an eye on the thing, however, something shot up from the metal window sill, like an electron thrown out from a sheet of radium, and I thought: I know this place Ive stayed here before.
Was I in the same suite I occupied 25 years ago? Perfectly possible, of course, though it would have been quite a coincidence, given the size of the hotel and the hundreds of rooms it had to offer. And if it was the same, why had no other feature of the place set the tuning fork of remembrance vibrating within me? Why should I remember only this mean little window and its aluminium sill?
Memory works in an inscrutable fashion. It seizes on and tucks away for safe-keeping the most negligible trifles, clinging to them through the years with the passionate miserliness of Molires Harpagon. It seems to have no capacity, and no desire, to exercise the least discrimination: all is grist to Mnemosynes mill. So it is that we shallremember with equal vividness the moment we fell in love for the firsttime, and that marble with the flame-red flash at its heart that fat Ronnie Reilly the class bully stole in the school yard at playtime one amber autumn afternoon 60 years ago. And the things it forgets, the apotheoses and apocalypses it lets sift through itsmesh!
As Freud shrewdly observed, what isremarkable is not that we remember, but that we forget.
When the photographer and film-maker Paul Joyce approached me with the idea of our making a book together on the subject of a lost Dublin, I forgot yes, I forgot all that I should have remembered about the blithely treacherous nature of memory, about its playful deceptions, its wilful insistences, its blind spots and black holes. Usually these days I have forgotten by dinner time what I had for lunch, but that kind of forgetfulness has nothing to do with the kind of Proustian feats of remembering I would be required to perform were Itoembark on a memoir of the Dublin Iknew or, more accurately, did not know in the 1950s and 60s. True, much of that Dublin survives, in its physical fabric, much more of it, indeed, than I had imagined would be the case. But who was I then, and whowas I now, to turn back and contemplate if not a lost city, then certainly a lost self?
The question fascinated Wittgenstein, among others, as to whether the babe in arms and the old man on his deathbed can be the same person. Do not the biologists tell us that by the time we reach old age all the cells we began with have been exchanged for new ones? We are that fabled axe which, having had its handle replaced, was found to need anew blade.
Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2016/oct/15/john-banville-dublin-city-lost-and-found