Today's Sunday Guardian column
Shifty
builders, corrupt politicians, and financial institutions ready to raise any
amount of money in order to make more of it. All of them prowling about in a
city being run into the ground so that a few can profit. That city could well
be Mumbai, but in the case of Claire Kilroy’s just-published novel, The Devil I Know, it happens to be
Dublin.
Aravind
Adiga’s Mumbai-based Last Man in Tower
deals with many of the same issues, but in a completely different manner. At
times Dickensian, at times satirical, at times clunky, Adiga’s novel focuses on
the greed of the middle-class hoping to profit from artificial property prices;
Kilroy’s The Devil I Know, on the
other hand, is a savagely farcical take on the malfeasance of those responsible
for the bubble in the first place.
Set
against the backdrop of the recent Irish economy boom-and-bust, this saga of
unreal estate takes the form of a testimony given by Tristram Amory St
Lawrence, the thirteenth Earl of Howth, who has returned to Ireland after years.
The name, by the way, is that of a character in Joyce’s Finnegans Wake, as is clear from the novel’s epigraph.
It
is March 2016, and Tristram is on the witness stand. Over ten days, he proceeds
to tell an enquiry commission of his part in the events that transpired eight
years ago. The voice Kilroy gives her character is distinctive, self-aware and
self-mocking: this mode of telling, combined with the testimony-like structure,
is immediately familiar, being used most notably by Nabokov.
An
interpreter for institutions such as the IMF and the EU, Tristram is forced to
stop over in Dublin, his ancestral home, because of a plane mishap. Overnight
he finds himself entangled in a web of deceit and avarice involving malleable property
laws, avaricious real estate brokers and bribable government ministers, which
proves to be not just his undoing but also of the others around him. As he puts
it, “this is something of a grey area. There are no white areas in my tale”.
Throughout,
Tristram asserts, he’s been in thrall to the mysterious, Machiavellian
character he calls Monsieur Deauville who’s been pulling the strings behind the
scenes. It is because of him that Tristram goes from becoming a translator of
languages to one of money. A shell company is set up, of which Tristram is a
representative and, and he tells the judge: “It bought nothing, sold nothing,
manufactured nothing, did nothing, and yet…it returned a profit of €66 million
that first year. Huge sums of untaxed money were channelled through it out to
the shareholders of its parent companies, which is perfectly legal under Irish
tax law, as you know. I did not make the laws. You made the laws….Me? I was
merely the conduit….Who better to direct a shell company than a shell of a
human being?”
One
of the main strands of the novel, it becomes clear, is that of how much of the
character of M. Deauville is real, what he actually stands for, and the nature
of the Faustian bargain that Tristram strikes with him. These are aspects
juggled by Kilroy till the very end, with some apt foreshadowing.
Tristram’s
vibrant voice is a pleasure to read, especially for those on a meagre diet of conventional,
realistic fiction. However, Kilroy is not above overstatement, occasionally
employing groan-worthy puns to make her point. “We were sole traders. We had
traded our souls,” is just one example.
Her
skewering of those whose greed for pelf led to Ireland’s contemporary woes, though,
is clearly born of deep anger. As Tristram puts it in one of the more resonant
passages: “[A]cross the country people were digging themselves into big holes…big
holes were spreading across Ireland like the pox, eating away at the heart of
the island. Nobody was interested in negative sentiments.” It’s not just in
Ireland that those big holes are growing more numerous.
No comments:
Post a Comment