Author: Agneta Pleijel
Year: 2020
Publisher: Norstedts
Language: Swedish
My first brush with Agneta Pleijel’s writing occurred in the early noughties through her work “Lord Nevermore”. This is a tale spun around two Polish souls of vastly different temperaments yet bound by the exquisite absurdity of friendship, and parted, as fate would have it, by the ruthless savagery of inane politics, in this case the first world war. What struck me the most was the ease and elegance with which she recreates the private chambers of her characters’ minds, not so much depicting the young men but rather listening in to a conversation between them. To read her was like attending a séance where the dead remained unaware of the living and conversed uninhibitedly with one another in our presence. In later years, she turned her art inward and produced that singular re-invention of the autobiography that I was moved to christen synaisthimatography; the cartography of the emotional landscape itself. By this work alone, she surely established herself as a towering giant of modern belletristic writing.
In “Dubbelporträtt”
(not available in English but a rough translation could be “A Double Portrait”),
Pleijel returns to the semi-biographical but deeply personal storytelling. The
tale is based on the true story of Agatha Christie, the undisputed queen of mystery,
sitting for Oskar Kokoschka, the world-renowned Viennese painter from whom
Christie’s grandson Matthew commissioned a portrait of his grandmother for her
80th birthday. Both Christie and Kokoschka reluctantly accept the
initiative.
In her
subtle orchestration of this encounter, Pleijel permits Kokoschka to try to
engage in meaningful and intimate conversation with his highly reserved subject,
in an attempt to capture her personality for the portrait. The elderly lady,
ever on guard and unwilling to let anybody in, especially not a foreign
painter, no matter how prominent her grandson assures her that he may be, proves
delightfully impervious to analysis. While the painter imagines himself
dissecting her soul, it is she who conducts the true inquisition, listening
serenely as he reveals far more of himself than she ever intended to yield.
And so the drama
unfolds across six sittings, each one a duel disguised as civility, while the
portrait slowly but surely takes form. Not until the very end, Christie finally
opens up and grants Kokoschka the keys to her inner self allowing for the
portrait to become the masterpiece that is still in Matthew’s possession to
this day. A memento of an English heart momentarily unveiled.
“Dubbelpoträtt”
may lack the sweeping grandeur of “Lord Nevermore” but the inimitable Pleijelan
blend of whit, warmth, and curiosity all abound. Beneath its modest frame,
dwells an investigation of more profound dimensions than first meets the eye. For
what, in truth, is a portrait? Is it the likeness of the subject, or the
confession of the artist? Is the final painting really a portrait of Agatha
Christie? Or is it a portrait of Oskar Kokoschka painting Agatha Christie?
And here
Pleijel strikes her most modern note. In an age intoxicated with machines that
imitate human thought and creativity, she reminds us that art has never been
about replication, but revelation. A machine may produce an image; only a human
can err beautifully enough to make it art.
Art in all
forms can be said to be a reflection of the artist. This includes the art of
writing. In an interview from 2020, Pleijel confessed that her choice of
exploring this legendary encounter was born from love for their arts. No one
was present in the room when Christie sat for Kokoschka. No one knows what words
were uttered. So Agneta Pleijel does what historians cannot. She invents. The
novel is a re-imagination of the event. The conversation is what Pleijel
imagines could have taken place. Or maybe even what she hopes actually
transpired.
Thus, as the
portrait was more about its creator than its subject, “Dubbelporträtt” becomes a
story less about Agatha Christie or Oskar Kokoschka and more about Agneta Pleijel.
Perhaps, she does not step into the minds of her characters. Rather, she
invites them to dwell within hers. As did Kokoschka. The outcome is that most
exquisite of human inventions; the fusion of creator and creation, where truth
and illusion clasp hands and become what we call art.

Inga kommentarer:
Skicka en kommentar