What do you think?
Rate this book
The Philanderer
Russell Conrad is young, good-looking, charming, and able. He has a good job and even better prospects in a big New York advertising agency. He is apparently a man much to be envied. But there is a flaw.
Conrad's love for his unsuspecting wife, Madeleine, is deep and lasting. Yet it is powerless to prevent him embarking on a series of affairs - with Suzy, the young model, with Clare, the dissatisfied wife of an office superior, and at the end with the secretary of his new employer. He has an intellectual awareness of his weakness and treachery in relation to women, but though in his calmer moments he despises himself, he yet continues on a course which he knows must finally wreck his marriage and his career.
Kauffmann tells his story of a modern rake's progress with sympathy and great skill. In 1954 The Philanderer was the subject of a prosecution at the Old Bailey on a charge of obscene libel. The publishers were acquitted. Mr Justice Stable's summing-up is included in this edition.
Conrad's love for his unsuspecting wife, Madeleine, is deep and lasting. Yet it is powerless to prevent him embarking on a series of affairs - with Suzy, the young model, with Clare, the dissatisfied wife of an office superior, and at the end with the secretary of his new employer. He has an intellectual awareness of his weakness and treachery in relation to women, but though in his calmer moments he despises himself, he yet continues on a course which he knows must finally wreck his marriage and his career.
Kauffmann tells his story of a modern rake's progress with sympathy and great skill. In 1954 The Philanderer was the subject of a prosecution at the Old Bailey on a charge of obscene libel. The publishers were acquitted. Mr Justice Stable's summing-up is included in this edition.
- GenresFiction
Mass Market Paperback
First published January 1, 1952
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews
February 14, 2012
So this is rather good. Russell Conrad is happily married, living in New York, rising in his field of PR/promotions, and a compulsive adulterer. In the opening lines, we see him lying beside a lovely young model, lazy from an afternoon of sex, and thinking to himself that he doesn't actually like her very much and it's time to get out. Then she drops the bomb: she doesn't like him very much either and wants to end things. "Panic flooded his breast. He couldn't allow her to throw him out. If it was over, he had to be the one to say so." Sex has very little to do with attraction or even with pleasure for him; it's about winning, about proving (to whom he's never quite sure) that he can do it, that he can succeed, that he can pull it off. He knows he's risking everything all the time--his happy marriage with his much-loved, intelligent, attractive wife, his career, his friendships, his public reputation--yet he can't quite stop himself. He resolves to, often, but his resolve dissipates the first time a new opportunity presents itself. "Christ," he asks himself at one point, "was he a high-school boy who had to look on every female he went out with as a prospect?" Well, yes, emotionally he is pretty much still a high school boy, albeit a very intelligent, articulate one. Part of Kauffman's point, I think, is that mid-century masculinity kept most men stalled at the level of late adolescence. Russell is intelligent enough to know how stupid this behaviour is, to know that it has nothing to do with just liking women (a common defence of philanderers when they're caught) or with needing sexual release. We get just enough of his personal history to understand part of what drives him, but he himself is rather mocking of easy psychological explanations. Thinking back to an earlier girlfriend, he remembers persuading himself that he cared about her: "For one thing, he was getting lots of wonderful kisses and embraces from Gwen; to deny that he was in love with her would be to cut himself off from all those kisses and turn himself out in the cold again. It would be like giving up one apartment before you found another." Whatever void his womanising is meant to fill, he knows it never will: "But in spite of these successes, one factor that never diminished was the terrible sense of urgency: the feeling that he must keep conquering to retain his social status. It was more pressing even than physical need, this idea that it was somehow disgraceful not to have at least one girl on the string and that a week without intercourse was vaguely unmanly." This novel deserves to be better known than it is. It's smart and well-written and often perceptive. It also, unusually for novels of this period by men, shows some awareness that the women involved are more than just props, that they have their own inner lives and needs.
December 18, 2023
From the JetBlackDragonfly book blog at www.edenthompson.ca/blog
Sixty years old and still a dynamite read.
It's the story of marital infidelity that reads like a script for the TV series Mad Men. Russell Conrad is a tall, dark haired, middle aged man who works in advertising for a magazine publisher. They have several lines of various interests, and are relaunching a confessions magazine as a homemaker title called Wife. Russell is up to head this department. He is happily married to Madeline and they socialize with various couple friends. Madeline is working at being an actress and hopes it will pay off before she turns thirty.
Russell's dilemma is his roving eye, as he sees every woman he meets as a challenge - and he usually wins. This is his story of addition to adultery, his love for his wife, and his mental exploration as to why he cheats. Instead of playing away from home like his many other friends, Russell feels compelled to look into his upbringing, and analyze his history with women. When he meets his bosses wife Clare, they strike up a friendship. This quickly turns into a romance which they keep hidden behind hotel room doors. Socially and at work, he explores other meaningful issues with his friends, such as man's relationship with God, and modern morality. They are continuing discussions about the meaning of good and evil in the Bible, Milton's Paradise Lost and Kafka, as Russell enthusiastically tries to justify his actions to himself. Even when he turns his life upside down to escape a soured affair, he's eagerly walking into the next one.
Although entertaining, this is not a racy read, but a look at society in New York in the 1950's. The tone and issues are so close to the series Mad Men that many characters of the show could have been based on this book.
However, when it came out in 1953 it was shocking and called obscene. Bookseller's in the UK, where it was titled The Philanderer were fined for stocking it, and police arrived at the door of the SoHo publishers to see if it wasn't in fact a cover for a porn house. The publisher was jailed and as his lawyer tried to build his case for an obscenity trial, his wife was saying no jury is going to convict him as she felt the book was "so dull that no jury, enlightened or otherwise, would be able to finish reading it." In jest, she built his case.
After the prosecution picked only the most licentious passages to read in court, the judge simply asked that the jury go home and over the weekend, they read the book from cover to cover. It was an unprecedented move. They came back and agreed it was not obscene, and taken in context the sexual situations added to a record of society, which like many other contemporary novels, act as a guide.
It's true that some of the language in these older titles is sexist and racist, but taken as a portrait of values at the time, it's really fascinating. I would, if you can find it, recommend it. It has a terrific ending.
Sixty years old and still a dynamite read.
It's the story of marital infidelity that reads like a script for the TV series Mad Men. Russell Conrad is a tall, dark haired, middle aged man who works in advertising for a magazine publisher. They have several lines of various interests, and are relaunching a confessions magazine as a homemaker title called Wife. Russell is up to head this department. He is happily married to Madeline and they socialize with various couple friends. Madeline is working at being an actress and hopes it will pay off before she turns thirty.
Russell's dilemma is his roving eye, as he sees every woman he meets as a challenge - and he usually wins. This is his story of addition to adultery, his love for his wife, and his mental exploration as to why he cheats. Instead of playing away from home like his many other friends, Russell feels compelled to look into his upbringing, and analyze his history with women. When he meets his bosses wife Clare, they strike up a friendship. This quickly turns into a romance which they keep hidden behind hotel room doors. Socially and at work, he explores other meaningful issues with his friends, such as man's relationship with God, and modern morality. They are continuing discussions about the meaning of good and evil in the Bible, Milton's Paradise Lost and Kafka, as Russell enthusiastically tries to justify his actions to himself. Even when he turns his life upside down to escape a soured affair, he's eagerly walking into the next one.
Although entertaining, this is not a racy read, but a look at society in New York in the 1950's. The tone and issues are so close to the series Mad Men that many characters of the show could have been based on this book.
However, when it came out in 1953 it was shocking and called obscene. Bookseller's in the UK, where it was titled The Philanderer were fined for stocking it, and police arrived at the door of the SoHo publishers to see if it wasn't in fact a cover for a porn house. The publisher was jailed and as his lawyer tried to build his case for an obscenity trial, his wife was saying no jury is going to convict him as she felt the book was "so dull that no jury, enlightened or otherwise, would be able to finish reading it." In jest, she built his case.
After the prosecution picked only the most licentious passages to read in court, the judge simply asked that the jury go home and over the weekend, they read the book from cover to cover. It was an unprecedented move. They came back and agreed it was not obscene, and taken in context the sexual situations added to a record of society, which like many other contemporary novels, act as a guide.
It's true that some of the language in these older titles is sexist and racist, but taken as a portrait of values at the time, it's really fascinating. I would, if you can find it, recommend it. It has a terrific ending.
December 30, 2021
OK, so I know this isn’t a particularly popular opinion, but I found this book a genuine grind.
The protagonist was unlikeable, presented as urbane and witty, but in practice came across as fatuous and facile. References to authors and philosophers were placed in his mouth in a way that made me feel like the author was showing off, not just his character.
I have no problem with books being a reflection of their time in terms of things like gender relations etc, but this felt like a particularly vicious example. The women this guy hurts (inevitably, if not in the actual pages of the book) are one-dimensional, presenting primarily as vehicles for the protagonist’s comfort or audiences for his erudition. Russell is conscious of the wrongs he is committing, yet commits them anyway, in a kind of sexual psychopathy.
I note that some of the other reviews feel as though the author has gone further than his contemporaries in terms of being sensitive to the women in the novel, but honestly I don’t get that impression. It feels as though we are a prurient audience to a psychiatrist couch session for a character from Mad Men.
Russell seems to escape the consequences of his actions, but we know that sooner or later that lives are going to be ruined.
So I’m trying to think about how a book called a The Philanderer could be written, if not in this way. I get that it was always going to have to be nasty. I honestly can’t say what I’m looking for. Should Russell get his comeuppance? Should the women be cheating on HIM (confess I was anticipating this twist). Should the impact on the children be considered? There’s pretty much zero consideration of this in the book. Maybe that’s what gets to me about this book - the self-centred-ness of the protagonist is taken as a given - and I honestly don’t think that’s the way the world works. The novel feels like an intellectual exercise in exploring the motivation of a serial cheater, and as a result the characters rarely get off the page.
Not for me, I’m afraid.
The protagonist was unlikeable, presented as urbane and witty, but in practice came across as fatuous and facile. References to authors and philosophers were placed in his mouth in a way that made me feel like the author was showing off, not just his character.
I have no problem with books being a reflection of their time in terms of things like gender relations etc, but this felt like a particularly vicious example. The women this guy hurts (inevitably, if not in the actual pages of the book) are one-dimensional, presenting primarily as vehicles for the protagonist’s comfort or audiences for his erudition. Russell is conscious of the wrongs he is committing, yet commits them anyway, in a kind of sexual psychopathy.
I note that some of the other reviews feel as though the author has gone further than his contemporaries in terms of being sensitive to the women in the novel, but honestly I don’t get that impression. It feels as though we are a prurient audience to a psychiatrist couch session for a character from Mad Men.
Russell seems to escape the consequences of his actions, but we know that sooner or later that lives are going to be ruined.
So I’m trying to think about how a book called a The Philanderer could be written, if not in this way. I get that it was always going to have to be nasty. I honestly can’t say what I’m looking for. Should Russell get his comeuppance? Should the women be cheating on HIM (confess I was anticipating this twist). Should the impact on the children be considered? There’s pretty much zero consideration of this in the book. Maybe that’s what gets to me about this book - the self-centred-ness of the protagonist is taken as a given - and I honestly don’t think that’s the way the world works. The novel feels like an intellectual exercise in exploring the motivation of a serial cheater, and as a result the characters rarely get off the page.
Not for me, I’m afraid.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
April 2, 2017
This book was profound for me; I had a lot of space to contemplate it.
I especially appreciated the authors mentioning of the biblical tale of forbidden fruit in the garden of Eden and the pointing out that, according to religious proverb, human beings are meant to exercise their will power and, because of their inevitable failure, are then meant to seek His forgiveness. For if God intended a world free of sin, he would, with his godly powers, simply prevent it. Take away: try as you might, you are human and you will fail.
I felt grateful for the role of literature in society; it's perhaps the one place where honesty is allowed (under the guise of a fictional protagonist). In the story, this character grappled with infidelity, and, convinced that he was a good person, poked into his memories to figure out, or to posit, causes of his unshakeable behaviours.
As a female, I acknowledged that the sexism prevalent at the time the book was written is still pervasive today. As an atheist, I appreciated the way that religion was described - it's role becoming less relevant in guiding morality. I related to another of the protagonists points, if, in fact, Jesus was a man and the bible was written by men, then men (human beings) are the authors; and human beings are capable of setting out moral standards.
This book really gets at the nature of humankind, to aim high and fall low of the mark.
I especially appreciated the authors mentioning of the biblical tale of forbidden fruit in the garden of Eden and the pointing out that, according to religious proverb, human beings are meant to exercise their will power and, because of their inevitable failure, are then meant to seek His forgiveness. For if God intended a world free of sin, he would, with his godly powers, simply prevent it. Take away: try as you might, you are human and you will fail.
I felt grateful for the role of literature in society; it's perhaps the one place where honesty is allowed (under the guise of a fictional protagonist). In the story, this character grappled with infidelity, and, convinced that he was a good person, poked into his memories to figure out, or to posit, causes of his unshakeable behaviours.
As a female, I acknowledged that the sexism prevalent at the time the book was written is still pervasive today. As an atheist, I appreciated the way that religion was described - it's role becoming less relevant in guiding morality. I related to another of the protagonists points, if, in fact, Jesus was a man and the bible was written by men, then men (human beings) are the authors; and human beings are capable of setting out moral standards.
This book really gets at the nature of humankind, to aim high and fall low of the mark.
September 7, 2017
This is a well-told but familiar story. A PR guy married to a hot chick, cheats on the hot chick with a number of other hot chicks, and hates himself for it. Why is he that way? Well, there are flashbacks to tell us. The charactarization of the philanderer is good -- he's the Don Draper next door; the good guy with the dark side, who is always ruminating on his moral failings, but is incapable of doing anything about them. The plotting is less good and the ending is the way these things always seem to end. After Dodsworth, the tired male businessman of fiction is never granted an epiphany, never takes to the road to Damascus, and is almost always doomed with the self-knowledge that his sins will find him out, someday (but usually after incredible damage is suffered by all). The women? Well, the author's eye sees them, but seems to be glossing over the damage this guy does.
A tale of its time.
A tale of its time.
July 7, 2024
Interesting, especially in the time period it was written. Loved all the female characters which I wasn’t expecting going into this book. Made me think about what love is a lot, why cheating happens when people claim they love their partners, and not wanting an open relationship. Having to be the winner etc etc etc. (not in the relationship, rather just to prove he can)
However I found the storyline low key boring. I liked (loved) how much the book made me think, all the discussions on morals/love etc. but the storyline was meh. Also saw the ending from a mile off, would have enjoyed a twisty twirly of SOME sort, maybe his wife cheating on him would have been too obvious, so I’m glad that wasn’t the case, but even though if any off this happened to a friend of mine it would be wildlwy hot gossip, story wise it was whatever. But I feel like it would end up a good visual art house movie or something
However I found the storyline low key boring. I liked (loved) how much the book made me think, all the discussions on morals/love etc. but the storyline was meh. Also saw the ending from a mile off, would have enjoyed a twisty twirly of SOME sort, maybe his wife cheating on him would have been too obvious, so I’m glad that wasn’t the case, but even though if any off this happened to a friend of mine it would be wildlwy hot gossip, story wise it was whatever. But I feel like it would end up a good visual art house movie or something
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
August 25, 2021
Russell laughed and said, 'What about Kafka? What does he have to say?"
'Well, I can't remember his exact words, either,' said Florence. But he says that when God said there was a penalty of death for eating the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge, what God meant was, nobody can be content with just simply having the knowledge of good and evil; a man has to try to act in accordance with that knowledge. And no man has the strength, the moral strength, to live up to it completely. So he kills himself in the attempt. Once he has that knowledge, he has to try to live up to it; and he's doomed to kill himself trying. That's what God meant by the death penalty, says Kafka.' Russell stared at her a moment and suddenly seemed to hear everything go quiet. 'Yes,' he said soberly...
'Well, I can't remember his exact words, either,' said Florence. But he says that when God said there was a penalty of death for eating the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge, what God meant was, nobody can be content with just simply having the knowledge of good and evil; a man has to try to act in accordance with that knowledge. And no man has the strength, the moral strength, to live up to it completely. So he kills himself in the attempt. Once he has that knowledge, he has to try to live up to it; and he's doomed to kill himself trying. That's what God meant by the death penalty, says Kafka.' Russell stared at her a moment and suddenly seemed to hear everything go quiet. 'Yes,' he said soberly...
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews