If I may for a moment speak in my capacity as a homosexualist, I think I'll risk the generalisation that it is difficult not to be self-conscious about such a condition even if you were born, as I was, a good twenty-two years after the Wolfenden Report moved for the legalisation of homosexual behaviour between consenting males in private.
Mr Grew, I believe, lived through those times, or shortly after, while Michael Tippett was already not merely a practising homosexualist but quite an accomplished one by 1957. Nonetheless I think it would be hard to make the case that an English homosexualist of Sir Michael's generation was not almost inevitably self-conscious.
Mr Grew is I presume aware of the (it seems not entirely well-founded or wholly substantiated) rumour that Herschel Grynspan and the man he shot Ernst vom Rath were in fact secret lovers.
We thank Mr. Now for drawing to our attention this "rumour," of which until now we had been either entirely
not or only in some way subliminally aware. After a little consideration though it does seem to us to be not unlikely - not merely a likely story.
First of all, we ourselves have in the East experienced a pickle very similar to that of Vom Rath, instigated by a perceived broken undertaking; in our case the weapons of choice were thank Goodness a bottle of ink (not avoided) and later a rock from behind on a crowded street (adroitly deflected since we have
eyes in the back of our head) rather than bullets or acid.
Here are two worthwhile links, but reliable sources for and substantiations of the most interesting parts are as Mr. Now has indicated absent. Following Mr. Derks's suggestion we performed a quick scan of Peyrefitte's oeuvre in this regard but to no avail.
http://www.anoca.org/he/vom/herschel_grynszpan.htmlhttp://www.roizen.com/ron/grynszpan.htmIt is said that vom Rath had two sobriquets: "
Madame l'Ambassadeur" and "
Notre Dame de Paris" - it is unusual may we say for the one person to have
two, so he must have earned them by being quite outstandingly outrageous. Or it may all be fiction. This is something which
is susceptible of confirmation and we encourage budding historians to set to work before it is too late. Here he is - is that a duelling scar we see?
Also Herschel Grynspan is said to have met vom Rath in a "gay bar" ("
le Boeuf sur le Toit" - shades of Milhaud the plump polytonalist of the "wrong-note" school) which again in our (vast) experience seems very likely given his (poor Herschel's) life story and situation up to that point and the fact that it was Paris.
Gide - who like Peyrefitte was certainly in a position to know - seems to have believed it, but we did look up his
Journal for 1938 and were rather surprised not to find the quoted passage. Again this is something susceptible of confirmation through careful scholarly research; we need to get hold of Professor Döscher's article for a start.
So - and here is the
important question in the context of
this thread: if Gide knew how could Tippett
not have known? We may conclude that Tippett too did know may we not, and that fact must throw additional light upon this work of his - especially upon the second of its three sections ("
The Child enmeshed in the drama of his personal fate and the elemental social forces of our day"). But in fact the text of this second section (all written by Tippett himself incidentally - jolly old Eliot so popular and omnipresent at one time rejected the task) is more about the accepted version of the mother the aunt and the uncle, with the possible exception of these lines towards the end:
"He shoots the official -
"But he shoots only his dark brother -"
"And see - he is dead."
So perhaps
even here Tippett in his self-conscious English way was
not being entirely straightforward.
P.S. Mr. Now mentions
1957, presumably because it was the year of the Wolfenden Report; but actually
1967 was more significant; nothing much changed in practice until then was that not so . . .