Robert Byrne and Ignatius: Communication with Maurice duQuesnay

Since this blog is supposed to be about John Kennedy Toole and his novel A Confederacy of Dunces, and since I have spent the last six entries on articulating a general theory of humor, I thought I would pause that series and add an entry on Ken Toole.

A while ago, Prof. Maurice duQuesnay contacted me. He is a contemporary of Toole's and had known him and his family back in the day. I was familiar with his name, because he had written a forward to a lecture by Robert Coles that had been printed as a pamphlet, which I reviewed in my bibliography of obscure Toole criticism. He had learned about me because of the bibliography.

He then sent me some texts, some of which relate to John Kennedy Toole. One was the 2009 issue (Volume 9) of an annual serial called Explorations. It contains three items relevant to Toole studies. First, duQuesnay wrote a memorial to Robert Byrne, the person many have argued was the model for important aspects of Ignatius Reilly's personality. The second item was a poem by Robert Byrne. And the third item was a review by duQuesnay of the Nevils and Hardy book, Ignatius Rising. I will briefly discuss each of the three here.

Prof. duQuesnay is a defender and supporter of Robert Byrne. He sees it as unfair that Bryne is identified with Ignatius Reilly. What I found interesting about the memorial is that, although Ignatius is not an exact copy of Byrne--and Byrne had many qualities Ignatius lacks--even in duQuesnay's positive description, you can easily see that Ignatius is indeed an exaggerated caricature of Byrne. So even an essay arguing against the Byrne-Ignatius relationship provides evidence for it. For more details, I refer you to the essay itself.

The poem by Byrne does not dispel the theory that Ignatius is a caricature of Byrne, either. It is not as ridiculous as a poem by Ignatius would be, but it has enough of a whiff of pomposity to suggest Toole had hit the mark.

I found the review of the book Ignatius Rising noteworthy because some contemporaries interested in the Toole legacy have seriously condemned the book, and duQuesnay does not. Joel Fletcher (writer of Ken and Thelma) and Kenneth Holditch (executor of Thelma's estate) both have heavily criticized Ignatius Rising for mishandling sources and using unreliable testimony to argue that Toole was gay. duQuesnay does not bring up that issue at all. For the most part he accepts the book's presentation uncritically. He spends most of his review showing that the book is as much about Thelma as it is about Ken. So not everyone who knew Ken Toole well hates Ignatius Rising.

Hopefully, if Prof. duQuesnay reads this blog entry, he will not be offended by my observations.