MLRy 98.4, 2003 1001 out by either author or narrator, Compagnon provides striking examples of how, for today's reader, much of the implicitness and assumption, especially in the representa? tion of homosexuality and Jewishness, risks becoming buried and lost. Compagnon's salutary reminder notwithstanding, Proust in Perspective is to be welcomed as a con? sistently impressive set of contributions that will stimulate furthercritical debate. Royal Holloway, University of London Edward Hughes Le Roman monologue: Montherlant auteur, narrateur, acteur. By Sabine Hillen. Paris: Lettres Modernes Minard. 2002. 212 pp. ISBN 2-85210-064-9. Critics of Montherlant's novels and theatre have tended to divide themselves into two camps: those who, apparently untouched by modern critical method, have seen his works as being essentially expressions of his own personal views, with the main char? acters sharing many of Montherlant's own characteristics; and those who, supported not only by the author's own protestations, but also by the norms of modern criticism which in part he seemed to prefigure, see there to be an essential distinction not only between the author and his characters, but also between the author and the narrator. Sabine Hillen, in this book, believes the latter interpretation to be as simplistic as the former.Taking Montherlant's statement that 'Si le public me confond avec Costals, il faiterreur', she comments: 'Peu importe que Montherlant soit Costals ou non; la ques? tion qui nous interesse est de savoir pourquoi et comment cette confusiona ete possible dans l'ceuvre romanesque'. She thereforesets out to study 'la specificite du langage romanesque ? les comparaisons, les silences, les mensonges, ete' and the differentways in which these are used in relation to differentcharacters, and then in relation to the narrator. The conclusion is that, by these almost invisible means, the author ensures that 'certaines voix ont toujours raison, d'autres jamais', as ie lecteur repere dans le langage des personnages privilegies les figures de predilection du narrateur', who in turn has much in common with the author. Hillen goes furtherthan this,when she ex? amines what we might call Montherlant's own 'impersonation' of himself in his own life, and his projection of that impersonation upon the characters, and the narrators, of his novels. She notes that both narrator and author share the same characteristic of 'variabilite', and cites in this connection the innumerable 'volte-face' to be found in Montherlant's prefaces and postfaces. I would go further than this by suggesting that, in both novels and theatre, Montherlant occasionally plays with the reader (or spectator) by displaying the same 'alternance' as an author that he has described as being typical of his characters. Hillen's book is fascinating and thought-provoking in its modification and questioning of what had become critical norms, and in the close reasoning that supports its thesis. The only drawback, and this comes no doubt of its being in origin a thesis, is that sometimes almost too many examples are cited foreach step in the argument, so that things occasionally seem to stand still. But this is a small price to pay forwhat is otherwise a very stimulating addition to Montherlant criticism. Penarth Richard Griffiths Albert Camus ig: 'L'Homme revolte' cinquante ans apres. Ed. by Raymond GayCrosier . Paris and Caen: Lettres Modernes Minard. 2001. 231pp. ?22.11. ISBN2-256-91031-8. Five of the nine articles in this volume revisit L'Homme revolte fiftyyears after the storm triggered by Camus's trenchant, impressionistic review of a murderous Euro? pean legacy. Denis Charbit provides a judicious reassessment of the essay, offeringa ...