Authors: Alberto Moravia
Before reconstructing the biographical and narrative context, we must describe these texts carefully, pointing out the details which are most useful for dating them and determining their internal order.
The first group of pages, which we have called
Version A
, consists of sixty-two typescript pages, unnumbered and unmarked by the author, plus nine more abandoned, rewritten, or substituted by him. According to the current numeration in the archive, this corresponds to pages 162–225 and 231–37 in Dossier 6 (Incartamento 6). Many pages, now restored, had deteriorated over time and include lacunae, especially near the margins.
Regarding the text, there are frequent typewritten corrections but none by hand, with the exception of page 214. The narrative sequence, which can easily be reconstructed despite a few lacunae which we will discuss later, is the following: pages 231, 162–215, 221–22, and 216–20. However, it is difficult to establish a date for the composition of these pages, because there are no material clues nor clues within the text itself—except for a generic reference to post-conflict events. The only clues can be derived from the order in which the pages were assembled and conserved within the suitcase; for example, page 161, a discarded or misplaced page (found) near a typescript identifiable as “II Monumento” (see
Opere
, volume 3, and in particular page 1118), a story that was published in the newspaper
Il Mondo
on March 24, 1951. Of course, this proximity does not allow us to date the typescript, in that it may well be accidental and may have occurred at a later date, but it may possibly indicate a
terminus post quem
, if we were to imagine a progressive accumulation of pages on the writer’s desk. In general,
Version A
seems to date from the period after March 1951. Another element, which we will consider later, is the obvious connection between this text and themes and characters in
Versions B
and
C
.
The missing sections comprise, for the most part, the beginning and the end of the text. The pages—or page—containing the true
incipit
of the narration have been lost. The top of the first page we do have, typescript page 231, which precedes all others from a narrative perspective, is severely damaged and probably does not contain the beginning of the story. In the present edition, after a lacuna, the beginning of the text seems to suggest a previous event (line 18 of page 231). In the preceding lines, Moravia had written a passage in triplicate, something he often did in the initial phases of composition. The text of lines 1–17 follows:
[…] The opportunity arose e
There is another missing passage between typescript pages 231 and 162. The passage probably comprises a single missing page, which in all likelihood contained the conversation between Emilia and Sergio, the outcome of which is described on page 162.
The story proceeds from there onward without interruptions for fifty-four typescript pages (162–215), which constitute the main body of the text that has survived. After page 215, one or more pages are missing. The two brief remaining sections (pages 221–22 and 216–20) have a clear, if not completely identifiable, connection to the earlier scenes and themes. In the first (pages 221–22), the two characters are still in the park of the Museo Borghese. This connects the scene to preceding events; we can hypothesize that there is perhaps only a single typescript page missing between pages 215 and 221. The final section (pages 216–20), in which Sergio accompanies the young girl to her new lodgings, clearly takes place later. What is more difficult to understand, because of the missing pages, is the scene in which the
two characters shop for a bathing suit—perhaps they were planning to go swimming in the Tevere, given the August heat.
There are a few clear breaks in the text—indicated with empty spaces or typewritten symbols, demarcating sections, however provisional these may be (on pages 164, 188, and 214). Based on these breaks, we can hypothesize regarding the basic structure of the narrative:
I. (pp. 231, 162–64): Maurizio breaks off relations with Emilia and Sergio.
II. (pp. 165–70): Sergio in the years leading up to the war
III. (pp. 170–88): the war years and the fall of Fascism
IV. (pp. 189–214): the visit to Maurizio’s house; the air raid
V. (pp. 215, 221–22, 216–20): the meeting with Nella
From a narrative standpoint, one can surmise that the first two sections are a kind of prologue, in which Maurizio and Sergio are presented to the reader and the story of their friendship before the war is recounted. The actual story begins in 1943, when Sergio is faced with the choice between taking a political stand and leaving Rome, between Federico’s proposal and Maurizio’s. It continues with the visit to Maurizio’s house and the scene in which Sergio and Maurizio meet Nella.
At the bottom of page 185 we see the only compositional note present on these typescripts: “He goes to Maurizio’s villa, decadence, dog and cat, Maurizio’s family.” This note clearly indicates what is to come in the following pages.
The second typescript consists of eighty-seven unnumbered pages. The archive subsequently numbered the pages, according to the order in which they were found: pages 55–66, 68, 70–74, 76–121, and 123–43, all from Dossier 6 (Incartamento 6). Among the tranches of Moravia’s project, the second is the most complete. Most of the corrections are inserted by typewriter, very few by hand (only on pages 62 and 105).
A few visual markings in the text clearly indicate narrative breaks. They consist of either typewritten symbols or empty spaces on pages 62, 84, 90, 108, 118, 131, and 140. The following structure is revealed:
I. (pp. 55–62): Sergio and Lalla
II. (pp. 62–84): Sergio and Lalla visit Maurizio’s house.
III. (pp. 84–90): dialogue between Sergio and Lalla
IV. (pp. 90–108): Sergio and Maurizio’s pact regarding Lalla
V. (pp. 109–18): the party at Moroni’s
VI. (pp. 118–31): the drive to Olevano
VII. (pp. 131–40): events at Olevano
VIII. (140–43): Sergio and Maurizio’s return to Rome
Regarding the dates of composition of this version, we have the following clues:
1) Two of the pages were reused by Moravia and contain, on the back, traces of earlier texts, which can be dated (pages 96 and 115). Typescript page 96 contains a brief narrative note on the back, which, due to
its format, appears to be part of a movie script (“An investor visits a textile factory; the owner of the factory is hoping for an investment. During the visit, the group”). As we will see, we can hypothesize that this note refers to the screenplay for a film by the French director Claude Autant-Lara, but we cannot exclude the possibility that it comes from an updated adaptation of Giovanni Verga’s story “La lupa,” which Moravia completed in 1953 for the director Alberto Lattuada. According to one critic, this consisted of “a complete revision of the narrative material, containing a new character, invented by Moravia: the owner of the Manifattura Tabacchi” (Agnoletti, 1953).
2) Two lines appear on the reverse of page 115 (“more and more, and everything was useless because the more I spent, the more she said I was stingy and that I hated to spend money, and on and on”). These lines belong to a draft of the “Roman tale” “Sciupone” (“Spendthrift”), which was published in the
Corriere della sera
on April 18, 1953 (see
Opere
, volume 3, page 519). Since Moravia usually completed his stories not long before they were published in the newspaper, this page gives us a
terminus post quem:
the writing on the reverse of the page cannot date from before April 1952. This is perhaps the most certain and significant clue we have regarding the dating of this text.
3) Two letters intermixed with the pages of
Version B
probably reflect the accumulation of papers on Moravia’s desk (pages 75 and 112). Page 75 contains an invitation to an exhibition, written on letterhead from the Centro Nazionale di Studi Umanistici di Roma and dated May 15, 1952. Page 112 is a typewritten
letter dated May 16, 1952, and addressed to “Riccio,” probably Attilio Riccio. In the letter Moravia discusses the contract for a screenplay (perhaps the one that appears on page 96).
4) Two pages (67 and 69) belong to
Version C
but are mixed in with the pages from
Version B
. This too is an important clue, because the intentional placement of these two pages among the pages of the second draft confirms the chronological precedence of
Version B
(written in the third person) with respect to
Version C
(written in the first person). In
Version C
, Moravia returns to characters and situations from
Version B
(such as the arrival at Maurizio’s villa on page 68 and the description of Maurizio on page 70), but he leaves pages 67 and 69 unfinished, mixed in with the pages of
Version B
, and decides to write them again. The new pages are placed in
Version C
(273 and 272*). (To avoid confusion, the pages from Dossier 4 are indicated with an asterisk; the pages without this symbol are all from Dossier 6.)
It appears that the typescript of
Version B
may date from the period April–May of 1952 and was subsequently used as a draft for
Version C
.
The third draft, which we have called C, consists of eighty-two pages, plus twenty-two additional pages abandoned or rewritten at this stage of composition. These are clusters of unordered pages whose narrative continuity can be easily reconstructed: pages 226–29, 230, 238–41, and 242–96 from Dossier 6 and pages 260*–74*, 238*,
237*. 236*, 235*. and 234* from Dossier 4. There are only a few corrections, written in pen on (pages 229, 255, 293, and 273*). Pages 144, 148–60, and 217*–33* were all discarded by the author. There are no page numbers or other notes.
There are very few clues to the dates of composition. The draft includes pages from another typescript (pages 145–47), that of the Roman tale “Il pensatore” (“The Thinker”), which was published in the
Corriere della sera
on May 4, 1962. But it is impossible to pinpoint the moment at which the pages were mixed together. However, since
Version C
was written after
Version B
and before Moravia began work on
Il disprezzo
(
Contempt
), as we will discuss, the composition of this version can be dated sometime between May and July 1952.
A few breaks in the text, which we have preserved, indicate breaks in the narration, some of which were probably temporary. The breaks are indicated with blank space or typed symbols and occur on typescript pages 229, 240, 249, 259, and 268*. Page 259 suggests a continuation, after the final line, “I would have liked to s
I. (pp. 226–29): the “first important event”: Sergio’s inscription into the Communist Party
II. (pp. 230, 238–40): the “second important event”: the encounter with Nella
III. (pp. 241–49): life with Nella
IV. (pp. 249–59): the encounter with Maurizio
V. (pp. 260–96 and 260*–68*): the party at Maurizio’s house
VI. (pp. 268*–74*, 238*. 237*. 236*. 235*, and 234*): Sergio’s conversation with Maurizio
Again, this is only a provisional breakdown. If we consider the structure of Moravia’s novels from this period, we can imagine that the author intended to include a prologue, distinguishable as such from the start, in which the narrator would illustrate the “two important events” in his life during the period after the end of the war; in other words, Sergio’s inscription into the Communist Party and his encounter with Nella. This would be followed by the first real narrative event; in other words, the “first chapter,” in which Sergio describes Maurizio’s invitation and the party.
The composition of
Version C
evolved in two phases, as suggested by the change in the name of the female character, from “Lalla” (as in the previous version) to “Nella.” Her characterization is profoundly different in each phase. As we will see, we are talking about an important rethinking of the character. This new version introduces, for the first time, the theme of “contempt” which will eventually lead to the abandonment of this project and the starting point of a new novel. For reasons of clarity, we will refer to phases C1 and C2.
The draft of C1 proceeds, without interruption, for about ten pages (226–29, 158–60, and 242–44). Lalla is self-assured, “rough,” provocative. But beginning on page 245, she becomes Nella, and is characterized by her timidity and gentleness. In this context, Moravia rewrites the pages describing their first meeting in the offices of the Allied Services, but does not bother to rewrite the pages that precede or follow this scene. He replaces pages 158–60 of C1 with pages 230 and 238–41 of C2. He hastily ties the the new pages together with the previous pages, crossing out (with a pen) the sections of page 229 in which the young woman first appears under the name “Lalla.” But he does not bother
to do this on following pages. This creates a confusing deformation of the text, caused by a lack of agreement between pages 241 (C2) and 242 (C1). The sequence and the author’s intentions are clear, but it seems that a revision parallel to the one on page 229 never took place.
In accordance with our decision to publish the text in its most advanced form, we have adopted phase C2, while including the corresponding pages from C1 in the appendix. In addition, we have made a few indispensible changes in order to connect pages 241 and 242. To begin with, we eliminated the first seven lines of page 242 (which appear in the appendix), just as the author did on page 229. As we have already observed, in this phase of composition, Moravia was not overly concerned with eliminating earlier versions but was careful to distinguish between abandoned versions and more recent ones. Once again we can theorize that the author was simply saving time and was planning to correct the draft in a later revision. Secondly, we changed the name “Lalla” to “Nella” in the three pages from C1 preserved with C2 (242–44). Despite these small edits, there are a few spots in which these pages refer to elements that have been either cut or altered. For example, the beginning of page 243 (“I said earlier that this was a difficult period in my life but in truth it was probably the happiest time I had known”) refers to a phrase that the reader will not find in the text but rather in the version that appears in the appendix. The same is true of the reference to the “radio service” (page 243), rather than to a generic office of the Allied Services, which refers back to one of the abandoned pages. Nella’s “clumsiness,” to which Sergio refers on page 243, is also a leftover from the character of Lalla.