What do you think?
Rate this book
The Coming Of Bill
The Coming of Bill (1920) is the nearest Wodehouse ever came to a serious novel, although the influence of the musical comedies he was writing at the time is never far away. Bill is the child of Ruth, a spoilt heiress, and Kirk, an impecunious artist of perfect physique. Their marriage has been arranged by Ruth's aunt, a believer in eugenics who then takes charge of the baby. The story, set entirely in New York and Connecticut, concerns the young couple's campaign to retrieve their child from the overbearing Mrs Porter and establish a normal family life. They are eventually successful, but only after a series of comic mishaps in a story which features a galaxyof vintage Wodehouse characters, including the bossy aunt, a tetchy millionaire, a good-natured ex-boxer and an orotund English butler.
320 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1919
81 people are currently reading
399 people want to read
About the author
P.G. Wodehouse
1,691 books6,937 followersSir Pelham Grenville Wodehouse, KBE, was a comic writer who enjoyed enormous popular success during a career of more than seventy years and continues to be widely read over 40 years after his death. Despite the political and social upheavals that occurred during his life, much of which was spent in France and the United States, Wodehouse's main canvas remained that of prewar English upper-class society, reflecting his birth, education, and youthful writing career.
An acknowledged master of English prose, Wodehouse has been admired both by contemporaries such as Hilaire Belloc, Evelyn Waugh and Rudyard Kipling and by more recent writers such as Douglas Adams, Salman Rushdie and Terry Pratchett. Sean O'Casey famously called him "English literature's performing flea", a description that Wodehouse used as the title of a collection of his letters to a friend, Bill Townend.
Best known today for the Jeeves and Blandings Castle novels and short stories, Wodehouse was also a talented playwright and lyricist who was part author and writer of fifteen plays and of 250 lyrics for some thirty musical comedies. He worked with Cole Porter on the musical Anything Goes (1934) and frequently collaborated with Jerome Kern and Guy Bolton. He wrote the lyrics for the hit song Bill in Kern's Show Boat (1927), wrote the lyrics for the Gershwin/Romberg musical Rosalie (1928), and collaborated with Rudolf Friml on a musical version of The Three Musketeers (1928).
An acknowledged master of English prose, Wodehouse has been admired both by contemporaries such as Hilaire Belloc, Evelyn Waugh and Rudyard Kipling and by more recent writers such as Douglas Adams, Salman Rushdie and Terry Pratchett. Sean O'Casey famously called him "English literature's performing flea", a description that Wodehouse used as the title of a collection of his letters to a friend, Bill Townend.
Best known today for the Jeeves and Blandings Castle novels and short stories, Wodehouse was also a talented playwright and lyricist who was part author and writer of fifteen plays and of 250 lyrics for some thirty musical comedies. He worked with Cole Porter on the musical Anything Goes (1934) and frequently collaborated with Jerome Kern and Guy Bolton. He wrote the lyrics for the hit song Bill in Kern's Show Boat (1927), wrote the lyrics for the Gershwin/Romberg musical Rosalie (1928), and collaborated with Rudolf Friml on a musical version of The Three Musketeers (1928).
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 115 reviews
March 26, 2020
Were I to go out on a limb, as I am often inclined to do, I would say that this book should be mandatory for engaged couples to read. I read it on a trip recently, and then––as soon as I finished it––I started it again, reading aloud with my wife. First of all, Wodehouse is positively hilarious (especially throughout the first half). Here is a sampling of both his laugh out loud moments and pithy sayings which are sprinkled throughout:
The minding of other people's business a duty not to be shirked.
[Many suitors had] laid their hearts at her feet. One and all, they had been compelled to pick them up and take them elsewhere.
They have all got little, narrow faces without chins or big, fat faces without foreheads.
Fatted ease is good for no one.
To think humbly of herself was an experience that seldom happened to her.
His face increased the illusion of squareness, for he had thick, straight eyebrows, a straight mouth, and a chin of almost the minimum degree of roundness.
Talent without hard work is a poor weapon.
[The Baby had] a dough-like face almost entirely devoid of nose, a lack-lustre eye, and the general appearance of a poached egg.
P.G. Wodehouse, The Coming of Bill
The main arc is that of a young man (Kirk) and woman (Ruth) who fall in love, get married in a whirlwind, have a goodly child (Bill), and then are driven apart due to financial ruin and meddling relatives.
Kirk is the quintessential husband in need of a spine, and Ruth is the quintessential wife in need of submitting. The journey each of them go on to see their besetting sin is both humorous and illuminating. Wodehouse nails how dangerous feminism is in a marriage, especially when a wife listens to someone other than her husband, and how the responsibility for the marriage lies at the feet of the husband.
A good novel is like a mirror that shows you your own tendencies towards the follies being displayed by the characters. Wodehouse makes it clear that busybodies are just the worst, and common sense courage is just the best. Men need to work hard and love their wives, wives need to honor their husbands and care for the children.
This really was a terrific novel. Perfect reading during a national quarantine.
September 20, 2025
"I guess I had better start right in again at the beginning," he said.P.G. Wodehouse was born in 1881. Oscar Wilde's 'The Importance of Being Earnest' premiered in London in 1895... when Wodehouse was 14. I mention that because of this novel - and also because I like to imagine the not-far-fetched idea that Wodehouse made a point of seeing the Wilde play (I can even see him in his theatre seat) - and, that, afterwards the experience simmered in the crockpot of his fertile imagination until (roughly) 1910 (when 'The Coming of Bill' appeared in its original serial form).
"Earlier than that," amended Penway.
In 'The Importance of Being Earnest', the strong-willed (to perhaps put it mildly) personage of Lady Bracknell is not the play's leading character. Yet she may as well be. When she appears, she is the only real force to be reckoned with.
The same is true of her equivalent in 'The Coming of Bill': Mrs. Lora Delane Porter - whose dominance in the novel is so pronounced that the first sentence of the first chapter begins with her name. Nothing gets past 'she of the gimlet stare'. You don't want to mess with her; it's practically impossible *to* mess with her. When it comes to the 'proper' way to live your life - as with Lady Bracknell - it's Mrs. Porter's way or the highway.
Meanwhile... the novel proper is concerned with the early married life of Ruth Bannister and Kirk Winfield: a rich girl and a modest-means guy. Mrs. Porter - a eugenics champion - has matchmade:
"Ruth and Mr. Winfield are both perfect types. Mr. Winfield is really a splendid specimen of a man. As to his intelligence, I say nothing. I have ceased to expect intelligence in man, and I am grateful for the smallest grain. But physically, he is magnificent. I could not wish dear Ruth a better husband. ... If you have ever studied even so elementary a subject as the colour heredity of the Andalusian fowl--"From the mouth of the same person, one would not be surprised to hear "Prism! Where is that baby?!" ~ mainly because, like Lady Bracknell, Mrs. Porter is child-obsessed - and preoccupied with what blood (and money) will tell.
It has been said that this novel was Wodehouse's single attempt at writing a serious novel; meaning, i suppose, a work that wasn't simply jokes from beginning to end. From beginning to almost-midway, the reader could wonder who started the 'rumor' of 'TCOB' being anything resembling drama. But I think it's around the time that baby Bill comes along that the narrative does indeed slowly turn... if not 'darker' in a more modern sense, then certainly darker than Wodehouse fans are accustomed to.
Those who love the Jeeves and Wooster & Blandings Castle books will recall that, in those books, weddings often happen at the end of them. We see couple after couple frenziedly trying to tie the knot and only managing to do so at the final fadeout. But in 'TCOB', the elopement (as it happens to be) comes fairly early on - and then the two lovebirds actually have to live together and tough out that 'period of adjustment' thing.
It seems that, privately, Wodehouse never cared much for exploring the nitty-gritty specifics of The Married State on paper. For the most part in Wodehouse works, the views we generally see of marriage are superficial ones; we simply never get that close. (Might, of course, hurt the jokes.)
But here we do get that close. Personally, I was fascinated by viewing Wodehouse through this different lens. ~ although the author's own thoughts on this novel (the plot for which he received from an editor) were: "I never thought highly of it."
That's actually unfortunate. But that may explain why this novel was something of a one-off, and why Wodehouse would go on to cozy-up to what was purely lighthearted instead.
So, yes... there's a slight dose of heaviness here this time around. But, all things told, the 'drama' is still on the lighter side. 'TCOB' is still, largely, a very funny book. Immensely readable & entertaining. Even Baby Bill is a stitch!
December 17, 2015
Maybe 3.5 stars. While I enjoyed this early Wodehouse, it was more realistic satire than the zaniness I am used to in his more famous books! The tongue-in-cheek commentary about love versus money would make a great film I think (and Wodehouse did write some good Hollywood scripts).
While I own this Kindle book, I actually listened to it via the Librivox recording.
While I own this Kindle book, I actually listened to it via the Librivox recording.
April 14, 2017
"A funny thing, life."
May 22, 2010
Every word I've read by Wodehouse is enjoyable -- I like his plots and characters -- even his obnoxious Lora Delane Porter in this story. It amazes me how everyone crumbled to her words andd made me wonder if I could have stood up to her. The fact that someone finally did cheered me no end. The entire story cheered me -- I like happy endings.
September 2, 2018
Plum tries his hand at satirical social commentary.
September 2, 2022
4-1/2 stars. When I read a book that forces me to re-read sentences just for the pure enjoyment of the way they are worded I know I've found a gem. In fact, I would pause and read them out loud to my sister so we could both enjoy them.
Loved the language, the humor, the characters, the themes, and the story itself.
Loved the language, the humor, the characters, the themes, and the story itself.
May 10, 2019
I read somewhere on Goodreads that this may have been the one serious novel Wodehouse ever wrote. It's definitely the first of his that wasn't filled with hi-jinks caused by misunderstanding. His writing is as good as ever, though.
July 31, 2022
To describe The Coming of Bill as a "light comedy" would be a stretch. There is but one chapter, in which the pugilist Steve Dingle engages in a hilarious conversation with the meddlesome and overbearing Mrs. Parker, where Wodehouse’s signature humor shines. Search as you may, it is hard to find other humorous instances in this book, not even when an orotund English butler named Keggs makes his occasional appearance in the story.
If Jill Mariner (Jill the Reckless) was the most endearing of all Wodehouse’s heroines, Ruth Bannister surely would have to be the most complex one. Ruth’s character undergoes so many transformations through the course of the story, it would be hard to pin her true nature. Overbearing women characters are dime a dozen in Wodehouse’s stories. Yet, before Lora Delane Parker, Aunt Agatha and Lady Constance Threepwood would seem meek and perfectly harmless.
Without question, this is the most unusual Wodehouse novel I’ve read. His classic humor may be absent in The Coming of Bill. But his masterful wielding of the English language, the way he can bend it to his every will, is very much evident in the story. Case in point: The robins which, though not so well advertised, rise just as punctually as the lark, were beginning to sing as they made their simple toilets before setting out to attend to the early worm.
If Jill Mariner (Jill the Reckless) was the most endearing of all Wodehouse’s heroines, Ruth Bannister surely would have to be the most complex one. Ruth’s character undergoes so many transformations through the course of the story, it would be hard to pin her true nature. Overbearing women characters are dime a dozen in Wodehouse’s stories. Yet, before Lora Delane Parker, Aunt Agatha and Lady Constance Threepwood would seem meek and perfectly harmless.
Without question, this is the most unusual Wodehouse novel I’ve read. His classic humor may be absent in The Coming of Bill. But his masterful wielding of the English language, the way he can bend it to his every will, is very much evident in the story. Case in point: The robins which, though not so well advertised, rise just as punctually as the lark, were beginning to sing as they made their simple toilets before setting out to attend to the early worm.
March 15, 2018
"There were a 'undred fifty of us, living in shoebox in middle of road!"
"Cardboard box?"
"Aye."
"You were lucky!"
- Four Yorkshiremen sketch from "At Last the 1948 Show"
I'm not quite sure what Plum was trying to do here: was he trying to write a serious novel of social commentary, was he perhaps working on a template for a Broadway musical? The result, whatever his motivation, is a slightly uncomfortable and entirely unconvincing production. It sounds funny to say this about Plum's writing, but all of the characters here feel like two-dimensional plot pieces: even the heavy, the eugenics-obsessed germaphobe Mrs. Lora Delane Porter, lacks the eclat of Aunt Agatha or Lady Constance Keeble. While there are passages of classic Wodehouse "business", and the ex-pugilist Steve Dingle strives mightily to bring some sparkle to the goings-on, this novel is a very odd concoction, indeed.
"But you know, we were 'appy back then, though we were poor."
"Because we were poor! My old dad used to say, "Money doesn't buy you 'appiness'."
"Aye, 'e was right."
"Aye."
"Cardboard box?"
"Aye."
"You were lucky!"
- Four Yorkshiremen sketch from "At Last the 1948 Show"
I'm not quite sure what Plum was trying to do here: was he trying to write a serious novel of social commentary, was he perhaps working on a template for a Broadway musical? The result, whatever his motivation, is a slightly uncomfortable and entirely unconvincing production. It sounds funny to say this about Plum's writing, but all of the characters here feel like two-dimensional plot pieces: even the heavy, the eugenics-obsessed germaphobe Mrs. Lora Delane Porter, lacks the eclat of Aunt Agatha or Lady Constance Keeble. While there are passages of classic Wodehouse "business", and the ex-pugilist Steve Dingle strives mightily to bring some sparkle to the goings-on, this novel is a very odd concoction, indeed.
"But you know, we were 'appy back then, though we were poor."
"Because we were poor! My old dad used to say, "Money doesn't buy you 'appiness'."
"Aye, 'e was right."
"Aye."
August 25, 2025
Kind of a strange book. But had a surprisingly good ending with a great overarching theme!
July 1, 2023
A very curious entry in the Wodehouse canon, being one of his only books with some major emotional vulnerability and a non-comical treatment of depression, marital alienation, and even death and suicide. Emotional abandonment and isolation, in favour of the-absurd-science-du-jour, are the key theme of the book, and one can certainly read the disgust at this mockery of parenthood (and childhood) between the lines in The Coming of Bill, even as it bashfully and, might one say, reticently retreats back into farce throughout -- it is still a very funny book on occasion, as every Plum book is -- but when you recall that Wodehouse himself was essentially discarded by his parents soon after his birth, and raised instead by a nanny and then by prep schools... then it can be a little heart-wrenching.
One sort of has to wonder how much of the autobiographical themes were even conscious, and how much some unconscious working out of emotions to which he otherwise never seemed to give outlet. Soon after, he would go back to the airiest of screwball lit the world would ever see, but for a few years in this early-middle period he sure had some sadness and sturm und drang to work out. One may hope he had some support!
One sort of has to wonder how much of the autobiographical themes were even conscious, and how much some unconscious working out of emotions to which he otherwise never seemed to give outlet. Soon after, he would go back to the airiest of screwball lit the world would ever see, but for a few years in this early-middle period he sure had some sadness and sturm und drang to work out. One may hope he had some support!
May 16, 2023
What a fascinating glimpse into Wodehouse's development as a young writer! This is one of his very early novels, and it shows the transition point between his (thankfully) short-lived exploration of Serious Literature into the lighthearted comic whimsy that was his real genius. This book is the tale of a young couple, Ruth and Kirk, who get married and have a baby, and must navigate conflicts arising from income and family background and child-rearing, and do so in a desperately boring, tedious, predictable, stupid way. Every bit of narrative relating to their conflicts and struggles is so tropey and tiresome. There is nothing of Wodehouse's wit and sparkle in it. It's like every other stupid, portentous, moralising bit of twaddle from the 1920s, complete with some ingrained racism that comes with the era: Ruth and Kirk's baby is nicknamed 'The Great White Hope' by his prizefighter godfather, Steve, a nickname arising from all sorts of problematic origins. Ruth's aunt is also an enthusiastic proponent of eugenics, and although she's not presented as someone to admire, the nature of her demerits arise more from her overbearing pushiness---rather explicitly connected with her feminism and belief in the equality of women--than from the actual content of her eugenic philosophy. I had to work pretty hard to make myself believe that the perpetual references to 'the future of the race' in the context of eugenics meant 'human race' and not 'white race', because, to be honest, it could just as easily have been the latter as the former.
The plot itself is ridiculous and stupid and depends on characters changing their fundamental nature and relationship with each other for absolutely no reason other than that Wodehouse needs to insert conflict here and resolve conflict there. It also seems utterly blind to the wild amounts of privilege that allows him and his characters to proceed in complete ignorance of the actual challenges he presents them with. 'I think it will be rather fun being poor again,' says Ruth at the end, completely forgetting that back when they were poor they were so broke that her husband had to go away for a year to Colombia, where his best friend died, and in his absence his son got sick and almost died himself. Things were genuinely quite grim! But the plot demands that they recognize the evils of wealth and embrace poverty, and so they conveniently forget that poverty brings its own evils--and, crucially, evils that you are powerless to control. Rich people can decide not to be dicks. Poor people can't decide not to starve. It's ridiculous and stupid.
I should note here that later Wodehouse plots are also ridiculous and stupid. But they know that they're ridiculous and stupid, and indeed, they lean into the ridiculous stupidity intentionally. The characters are good-hearted, well-meaning youngsters, to be sure, but they are all impetuous and more than a bit dim, so when they make dumb decisions for the sake of the plot, those decisions are consistent with their characterization. It's all in the service of generating entertaining chaos. Here, by contrast, characterization is twisted in knots to serve a plot that Wodehouse didn't really know how to write, and which would still have been boring and tiresome even if a better writer had written it better.
And yet this book is not a complete failure, because Wodehouse is Wodehouse, and no matter how much he wants to write a Deep, Thoughtful Morality Tale, he can't help including entertaining chaos in little scenes dotted all over, where his future strength starts to peek its head around the corner. When we're dealing with the side characters, rather than tedious boring Ruth and Kirk, all sorts of delightful details begin to come to the fore. Steve's dialogue is full of 1920s slang that perplexes everyone he speaks to. William Bannister Winfield, the titular baby, is very good--not because he himself is an adowablw baby, but because of the way the narrative presents his perspective in a sort of understated straight-man manner that somehow highlights all the absurdities inherent in babies. Take this bit, where we learn about the preparations for a visit from Steve and Bill to reconcile Ruth's father, Mr Bannister, a wealthy, stodgy grump of a Wall-Street financier. Mr Bannister did not approve of Ruth's marriage, but Steve is convinced that once he sees Bill, he will come to his senses:
Perhaps the real mistake of the expedition was the nature of its baggage. William Bannister [the baby] had stood out for being allowed to take with him his wheelbarrow, his box of bricks, and his particular favorite, the dying pig, which you blew out and then allowed to collapse with a pleasing noise. These properties had struck his parents as excessive, but he was firm; and when he gave signs of being determined to fight it out on these lines if it took all the summer, they gave in.
(It's the 'collapse with a pleasing noise' that gets me.) Throughout the following interview with the grandfather, already entertaining in the contrast between Steve's highly colloquial, increasingly flustered slang and the grandfather's curmudgeonly crusty unfriendliness, Bill's interactions with these toys are all used to exquisite comic effect. Perhaps recognizing that he was on to something good, Wodehouse gifts us towards the end of the novel another outstanding set piece featuring Steve and Bill in the countryside of Connecticut, which is as good as anything he wrote in the rest of his career. Really, if he had re-written the entire book from the perspective of Steve, it would have been terrific. It was only the decision to center boring old Ruth and boring old Kirk, and make the primary conflict a boring old trope, where the acquisition of wealth makes you a bad person, and in order to become a good person again you must lose all the money.
In sum, entertaining chaos is Wodehouse's real forte. When the goal is to write a moralising tale about the dangers of excessive wealth, he flounders and fails. When the goal is to write an absurd romp about young twits being dumb, he excels. Nowhere is that so obvious as in this book, where the moralising tale about Kirk and Ruth is a slodgy puddle of muck, while the absurd romps surrounding Steve and Bill are sparkling delights.
The plot itself is ridiculous and stupid and depends on characters changing their fundamental nature and relationship with each other for absolutely no reason other than that Wodehouse needs to insert conflict here and resolve conflict there. It also seems utterly blind to the wild amounts of privilege that allows him and his characters to proceed in complete ignorance of the actual challenges he presents them with. 'I think it will be rather fun being poor again,' says Ruth at the end, completely forgetting that back when they were poor they were so broke that her husband had to go away for a year to Colombia, where his best friend died, and in his absence his son got sick and almost died himself. Things were genuinely quite grim! But the plot demands that they recognize the evils of wealth and embrace poverty, and so they conveniently forget that poverty brings its own evils--and, crucially, evils that you are powerless to control. Rich people can decide not to be dicks. Poor people can't decide not to starve. It's ridiculous and stupid.
I should note here that later Wodehouse plots are also ridiculous and stupid. But they know that they're ridiculous and stupid, and indeed, they lean into the ridiculous stupidity intentionally. The characters are good-hearted, well-meaning youngsters, to be sure, but they are all impetuous and more than a bit dim, so when they make dumb decisions for the sake of the plot, those decisions are consistent with their characterization. It's all in the service of generating entertaining chaos. Here, by contrast, characterization is twisted in knots to serve a plot that Wodehouse didn't really know how to write, and which would still have been boring and tiresome even if a better writer had written it better.
And yet this book is not a complete failure, because Wodehouse is Wodehouse, and no matter how much he wants to write a Deep, Thoughtful Morality Tale, he can't help including entertaining chaos in little scenes dotted all over, where his future strength starts to peek its head around the corner. When we're dealing with the side characters, rather than tedious boring Ruth and Kirk, all sorts of delightful details begin to come to the fore. Steve's dialogue is full of 1920s slang that perplexes everyone he speaks to. William Bannister Winfield, the titular baby, is very good--not because he himself is an adowablw baby, but because of the way the narrative presents his perspective in a sort of understated straight-man manner that somehow highlights all the absurdities inherent in babies. Take this bit, where we learn about the preparations for a visit from Steve and Bill to reconcile Ruth's father, Mr Bannister, a wealthy, stodgy grump of a Wall-Street financier. Mr Bannister did not approve of Ruth's marriage, but Steve is convinced that once he sees Bill, he will come to his senses:
Perhaps the real mistake of the expedition was the nature of its baggage. William Bannister [the baby] had stood out for being allowed to take with him his wheelbarrow, his box of bricks, and his particular favorite, the dying pig, which you blew out and then allowed to collapse with a pleasing noise. These properties had struck his parents as excessive, but he was firm; and when he gave signs of being determined to fight it out on these lines if it took all the summer, they gave in.
(It's the 'collapse with a pleasing noise' that gets me.) Throughout the following interview with the grandfather, already entertaining in the contrast between Steve's highly colloquial, increasingly flustered slang and the grandfather's curmudgeonly crusty unfriendliness, Bill's interactions with these toys are all used to exquisite comic effect. Perhaps recognizing that he was on to something good, Wodehouse gifts us towards the end of the novel another outstanding set piece featuring Steve and Bill in the countryside of Connecticut, which is as good as anything he wrote in the rest of his career. Really, if he had re-written the entire book from the perspective of Steve, it would have been terrific. It was only the decision to center boring old Ruth and boring old Kirk, and make the primary conflict a boring old trope, where the acquisition of wealth makes you a bad person, and in order to become a good person again you must lose all the money.
In sum, entertaining chaos is Wodehouse's real forte. When the goal is to write a moralising tale about the dangers of excessive wealth, he flounders and fails. When the goal is to write an absurd romp about young twits being dumb, he excels. Nowhere is that so obvious as in this book, where the moralising tale about Kirk and Ruth is a slodgy puddle of muck, while the absurd romps surrounding Steve and Bill are sparkling delights.
January 28, 2011
Much more satirical (to the point of being much less funny!) than the mainstream of his later work, this book explores many political and social themes of the time with elegantly turned phrases and Wodehouse's genius for timing.
I continue to prefer books written 90 years ago and set in the present to books written now and set 90 years ago. I can't tell if its the language or the unspoken social conventions that seem so much more authentic. Maybe I'm a chronological snob. Anyway, this book is a prime example.
I continue to prefer books written 90 years ago and set in the present to books written now and set 90 years ago. I can't tell if its the language or the unspoken social conventions that seem so much more authentic. Maybe I'm a chronological snob. Anyway, this book is a prime example.
June 13, 2015
Well, so... Wodehouse's writing style is just the same (i.e. great). But the book is... not funny. A large majority of it is about a marriage falling to pieces. And while that theme has its own... poignancy, when combined with Wodehouse's writing, it's still not what one wants or expects when one turns to a Wodehouse book.
There was a happy ending, of course, but it felt incredibly tacked-on and unrealistic.
There was a happy ending, of course, but it felt incredibly tacked-on and unrealistic.
August 20, 2015
Apparently one of the few semi serious books written by P G Wodehouse and not one his better works in my opinion. A book with eugenics as the theme was hardly going to be a bundle of laughs but when presented by typically Wodehouse characters it really didn't work for me. Neither a serious treatment of this rather sinister subject nor the sparklingly frivolous caricatures of Bertie Wooster's familiar circle.
March 9, 2019
Audio.
My least favorite of the 20 or so Wodehouse I've read so far. I wanted funny. That's why I go to him. But this one isn't. I think it's intended to be funny but just fails.
Also, David Case (a.k.a, Frederick Davidson) is not my favorite narrator. Be does okay with the Jeeves books in general, but mostly he turns me off.
My least favorite of the 20 or so Wodehouse I've read so far. I wanted funny. That's why I go to him. But this one isn't. I think it's intended to be funny but just fails.
Also, David Case (a.k.a, Frederick Davidson) is not my favorite narrator. Be does okay with the Jeeves books in general, but mostly he turns me off.
July 15, 2013
Mrs. Porter considers Kirk a perfect husband for her perfect niece and when they eventually get married and have a child she insists that he must also be perfect, but her constant intrusion into their union becomes a major imperfection in their lives...
Read
July 28, 2011Eugencis meets upper crust NY socialites. Ok.
May 25, 2025
One of the strangest reading experiences of my life. The “unfunny” Wodehouse novel finally wrapped and put to bed. I was never quite sure when it comes to the official word on this novel: deliberately unfunny?…or, an attempt at yet another humorous novel by Wodehouse but a stunning failure? And hey, I just read it in a day…and I’m still not sure which of the above is true…
There is some humour in this. That may even be the problem, because I would argue that this plot that Wodehouse dedicated himself to this time around, is inherently a serious domestic drama. A family drama, and one that will make a reader sad, sad for the characters. Sad over the unexpected deaths, or near deaths (“WHAT!!??”). Sad over a marriage on the rocks from right around when it begins, and sad about the scheming supporting character trying to cause a divorce and sough actual bitterness. Or maybe not sough it - more like pump up bitterness and coldness that already exists in main characters (W! the! Actual! Fuuuuuuuu…!!!! KK!). The arguments are real. The marital discord is palpable.
It’s the funny bits that….ruin it. I can’t believe I’m saying that. About a Wodehouse novel?! I mean, there’s a quote by Wodehouse that kind of goes like this - ‘There are two ways of writing novels. One is mine, writing a sort of Musical Comedy. And the other is going down deep and not giving a damn’. Or something like that. I’m paraphrasing, but I’m close. The thing is, this very atypical novel seems like the Master for once deciding to go down deep and not giving a damn…but he’s not quite able to do it. He can’t not fiddle about and make jokes. It’s a very odd reading jag, this is, as a result of, among other things, an unsettling and inconsistent tone.
The young people these days, when they make reaction videos, soft-soap their displeasure when commenting on a movie they don’t like - because they don’t want to offend and lose viewers who love said film - by saying things like “Scream 3 is a movie…that exists.”. I would call that lowkey hate, expect that I’ve only started hearing the new term “lowkey” from the kids recently, and would be assuming its definition. - get back to me on that.
The Coming of Bill is a Wodehouse novel that exists. My Herbert Jenkins hardcover that was a gift to me when I was under 20 years of age in the 1980s finally got the attention I hesitated to give it. I knew this novel was a problem. I knew it when I read the Wodehouse biography I bought around the time I was given this novel (in fact, that biography might have been a gift too; I think it was! Or not…it was a remaindered hardcover, and how would I know that if it was a gift? Well, I might). Said biography is by Frances Donaldson, and I’m paraphrasing again, but she wrote that if a reader picked The Coming of Bill as their first Wodehouse novel, they would wonder what all the fuss was about. I could not agree more; this is not the Wodehouse book to start with.
As far as skipping it completely, well I can’t quite sell that position either. Bizarrely, I’m glad he wrote one book like this, and I’m glad I finally read it. But if most of his work behaved like this, he would not be my favourite writer. Thank goodness I picked Quick Service as my first; it was a whim pick, in front of a shelf of almost unending Wodehouse options hogging vast space stretching far left and right…and I learned later that Wodehouse picked Quick Service as his best among his own work (I’m not sure when he said that? He wrote a lot of great books after 1940, and may have changed his mind…though I do think I may have read his best book first!).
I think he should have gone all-in and not given a damn, and made this the dark, serious drama with tragedy it could have been. I mean, I got about halfway through, and thought “If this were any other writer, I would brace myself for a full-scale transition to a Horror novel, one of those Creepy Kid things”. Imagine The Fifth Child by Doris Lessing, as imagined by Wodehouse, decades earlier?! But I knew in my heart this was not going that far. And Wodehouse does indeed give up the half-hearted attempt to do pain and tragedy - going for a rather gonzo finale ignited by an abduction that comes from nowhere and seems to have ludicrous motivation. But it all ends up rather Fetch…it’s not happening.
When Robert Ludlum broke pattern it was like Felicity’s haircut; Ludlum was cosmically bound to write Thrillers with the same sort of title construction: the word ‘The’, followed by two other words. The Bourne Identity, The Siamese Connection. Then he published a book with one word in the title and sales plummeted for that one effort. This is a little different than that. But Ludlum did go back to the familiar title formula. And thank goodness Wodehouse snapped out of whatever The Coming of Bill was, and found the track.
There is some humour in this. That may even be the problem, because I would argue that this plot that Wodehouse dedicated himself to this time around, is inherently a serious domestic drama. A family drama, and one that will make a reader sad, sad for the characters. Sad over the unexpected deaths, or near deaths (“WHAT!!??”). Sad over a marriage on the rocks from right around when it begins, and sad about the scheming supporting character trying to cause a divorce and sough actual bitterness. Or maybe not sough it - more like pump up bitterness and coldness that already exists in main characters (W! the! Actual! Fuuuuuuuu…!!!! KK!). The arguments are real. The marital discord is palpable.
It’s the funny bits that….ruin it. I can’t believe I’m saying that. About a Wodehouse novel?! I mean, there’s a quote by Wodehouse that kind of goes like this - ‘There are two ways of writing novels. One is mine, writing a sort of Musical Comedy. And the other is going down deep and not giving a damn’. Or something like that. I’m paraphrasing, but I’m close. The thing is, this very atypical novel seems like the Master for once deciding to go down deep and not giving a damn…but he’s not quite able to do it. He can’t not fiddle about and make jokes. It’s a very odd reading jag, this is, as a result of, among other things, an unsettling and inconsistent tone.
The young people these days, when they make reaction videos, soft-soap their displeasure when commenting on a movie they don’t like - because they don’t want to offend and lose viewers who love said film - by saying things like “Scream 3 is a movie…that exists.”. I would call that lowkey hate, expect that I’ve only started hearing the new term “lowkey” from the kids recently, and would be assuming its definition. - get back to me on that.
The Coming of Bill is a Wodehouse novel that exists. My Herbert Jenkins hardcover that was a gift to me when I was under 20 years of age in the 1980s finally got the attention I hesitated to give it. I knew this novel was a problem. I knew it when I read the Wodehouse biography I bought around the time I was given this novel (in fact, that biography might have been a gift too; I think it was! Or not…it was a remaindered hardcover, and how would I know that if it was a gift? Well, I might). Said biography is by Frances Donaldson, and I’m paraphrasing again, but she wrote that if a reader picked The Coming of Bill as their first Wodehouse novel, they would wonder what all the fuss was about. I could not agree more; this is not the Wodehouse book to start with.
As far as skipping it completely, well I can’t quite sell that position either. Bizarrely, I’m glad he wrote one book like this, and I’m glad I finally read it. But if most of his work behaved like this, he would not be my favourite writer. Thank goodness I picked Quick Service as my first; it was a whim pick, in front of a shelf of almost unending Wodehouse options hogging vast space stretching far left and right…and I learned later that Wodehouse picked Quick Service as his best among his own work (I’m not sure when he said that? He wrote a lot of great books after 1940, and may have changed his mind…though I do think I may have read his best book first!).
I think he should have gone all-in and not given a damn, and made this the dark, serious drama with tragedy it could have been. I mean, I got about halfway through, and thought “If this were any other writer, I would brace myself for a full-scale transition to a Horror novel, one of those Creepy Kid things”. Imagine The Fifth Child by Doris Lessing, as imagined by Wodehouse, decades earlier?! But I knew in my heart this was not going that far. And Wodehouse does indeed give up the half-hearted attempt to do pain and tragedy - going for a rather gonzo finale ignited by an abduction that comes from nowhere and seems to have ludicrous motivation. But it all ends up rather Fetch…it’s not happening.
When Robert Ludlum broke pattern it was like Felicity’s haircut; Ludlum was cosmically bound to write Thrillers with the same sort of title construction: the word ‘The’, followed by two other words. The Bourne Identity, The Siamese Connection. Then he published a book with one word in the title and sales plummeted for that one effort. This is a little different than that. But Ludlum did go back to the familiar title formula. And thank goodness Wodehouse snapped out of whatever The Coming of Bill was, and found the track.
January 2, 2022
First of all: not a comedy, although it does start out with some satire on the eugenics movement. In case you're happily unaware, eugenics was a pseudoscientific idea very popular in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, especially in the US, until the Third Reich took it to its ultimate extreme and it became (rightly) tainted by association. It then quietly faded from mainstream popularity, though it remains a fringe idea, and a subtle, unexamined influence on some other political philosophies, even today. Instead of attributing measurable differences between the rich and the poor, and between different races, to the very different social and economic conditions they lived in, eugenics attributed them (in the absence of any real understanding of genetics much beyond the Mendelian level) to heredity. In other words, the kind of people who wrote books about eugenics believed that the reason they were, in general, healthier and wealthier and less likely to be in jail or mentally challenged than the poor was not that they had lived all their lives in better conditions, but that they were inherently a better kind of people. The appeal of this idea is fairly obvious.
[Plot spoilers follow; I'm putting them in spoiler tags, but without knowing what happens my commentary won't make as much sense.]
Honestly, most Wodehouse romances would, in reality, have led to marriages like this; the couples get engaged, and then married, on minimal acquaintance, and some of them are intensely unsuited to marry one another, perhaps even to marry anyone (the couple from The Girl on the Boat comes immediately to mind). Wodehouse had never explored this domestic-drama territory previously, and didn't again. There were other writers doing it better, and there were things he himself did much better (namely farcical comedy, of which there are only hints in this book).
We do get the well-drawn supporting characters; Wodehouse's supporting characters, early on, have much more personality than his principals. Steve, the ex-prize fighter, is especially wonderful, and the awful Aunt Lora is also vivid and believable. The couple themselves have, by the nature of the plot, a bit more interiority than his usual romantic leads, but they, and especially the wife, remain more types than individuals. Still, Wodehouse is very good at depicting types, and showing their absurdity, and even if he gets a lot more serious with it in this book than ever before or since, there are still flashes of his wit and facility with language throughout.
[Plot spoilers follow; I'm putting them in spoiler tags, but without knowing what happens my commentary won't make as much sense.]
Honestly, most Wodehouse romances would, in reality, have led to marriages like this; the couples get engaged, and then married, on minimal acquaintance, and some of them are intensely unsuited to marry one another, perhaps even to marry anyone (the couple from The Girl on the Boat comes immediately to mind). Wodehouse had never explored this domestic-drama territory previously, and didn't again. There were other writers doing it better, and there were things he himself did much better (namely farcical comedy, of which there are only hints in this book).
We do get the well-drawn supporting characters; Wodehouse's supporting characters, early on, have much more personality than his principals. Steve, the ex-prize fighter, is especially wonderful, and the awful Aunt Lora is also vivid and believable. The couple themselves have, by the nature of the plot, a bit more interiority than his usual romantic leads, but they, and especially the wife, remain more types than individuals. Still, Wodehouse is very good at depicting types, and showing their absurdity, and even if he gets a lot more serious with it in this book than ever before or since, there are still flashes of his wit and facility with language throughout.
November 10, 2022
When a chance encounter leads to the meeting of the fine physical specimen that is Kirk Wingfield and the eugenicist Lora Delane Porter, the latter decides that he is the perfect husband for her niece Ruth. But whilst Kirk and Ruth are amenable, Ruth’s father is not and the couple hastily elope. After producing a child, Kirk – a struggling artist – feels financially responsible and heads off to make his fortune. On his unsuccessful return, however, he finds that his son, Bill, is being raised in sterile isolation because of Lora’s obsession with germs and his wife, now the inheritor of her late father’s estate, seems perfectly content to be barely involved with Bill’s upbringing. With his marriage faltering, Bill’s life appears to be coming unravelled, until his friend Steve decides to get involved.
The Coming of Bill is unusual in the Wodehouse canon in that it is not really a comedy at all. Whilst’s Plum’s writing retains his lightness of touch with the prose, the subject matter and characterisations seem somewhat darker than one expects, making it almost a kitchen sink drama. Eugenics is, of course, hardly a light subject, but apart from giving Lora a motive in bringing Kirk and Ruth together, this doesn’t really factor much into the plot. Instead, it is the obsession with germs and the corrupting influence of money that really drive developments.
Kirk is something of a conflicted man, much different to Wodehouse’s usual happy-go-lucky heroes, and whilst Lora is definitely the villain of the piece, the character of Ruth is also surprisingly unsympathetic. This gives the work a slightly bitter edge and somewhat undermines the intended happy ending. It may also be the case that because the book appeared as a novel somewhat after it was written, that it suffers by comparison to the books published around it – Wodehouse by then having begun to perfect his comic writing. Read just after the school stories where Wodehouse began, it might well come across more favourably, as a significant development in story and character.
Overall, Bill is an interesting oddity, but probably one for completists only.
The Coming of Bill is unusual in the Wodehouse canon in that it is not really a comedy at all. Whilst’s Plum’s writing retains his lightness of touch with the prose, the subject matter and characterisations seem somewhat darker than one expects, making it almost a kitchen sink drama. Eugenics is, of course, hardly a light subject, but apart from giving Lora a motive in bringing Kirk and Ruth together, this doesn’t really factor much into the plot. Instead, it is the obsession with germs and the corrupting influence of money that really drive developments.
Kirk is something of a conflicted man, much different to Wodehouse’s usual happy-go-lucky heroes, and whilst Lora is definitely the villain of the piece, the character of Ruth is also surprisingly unsympathetic. This gives the work a slightly bitter edge and somewhat undermines the intended happy ending. It may also be the case that because the book appeared as a novel somewhat after it was written, that it suffers by comparison to the books published around it – Wodehouse by then having begun to perfect his comic writing. Read just after the school stories where Wodehouse began, it might well come across more favourably, as a significant development in story and character.
Overall, Bill is an interesting oddity, but probably one for completists only.
December 22, 2022
A great, funny book by a great writer, but only if you can overlook the racism, misogyny and eugenics throughout.
This fiction requires more than a suspension of disbelief. It also requires a suspension of modern sensibilities, or at least the ability to acknowledge offense without letting it spoil the fun.
Although eugenics is frequently the butt of the joke, being the antagonist’s goal in the book, it being openly addressed was shocking enough to me to pull me out of the story and put it down. That’s why it took me so long to read the whole thing.
Wodehouse has many many other funny books that are less challenging to the moral stance of the modern reader. Still, this book is sweet, funny, and deeply insightful about relationships and character motivations even while enjoyable plot twists and general hi jinx ensue.
This fiction requires more than a suspension of disbelief. It also requires a suspension of modern sensibilities, or at least the ability to acknowledge offense without letting it spoil the fun.
Although eugenics is frequently the butt of the joke, being the antagonist’s goal in the book, it being openly addressed was shocking enough to me to pull me out of the story and put it down. That’s why it took me so long to read the whole thing.
Wodehouse has many many other funny books that are less challenging to the moral stance of the modern reader. Still, this book is sweet, funny, and deeply insightful about relationships and character motivations even while enjoyable plot twists and general hi jinx ensue.
April 19, 2024
This took a while to get interesting. The characters in the first half lacked personality and were more stock characters (the bossy aunt, the rich ingenue, the young artist). Things picked up after Kirk's trip to South America when he realized he wanted to be more than just a dilettante. The end is a bang-up bit involving a kidnapping and fist fight. Ex-fighter Steve was a highlight of the climax.
I'm surprised this was only made into a silent film since it seems like just the sort of fare that would have been popular in the 1930s, maybe with Joel McCrae and Babara Stanwyck.
Wodehouse avoids the "a real man won't live off his wife's money" stereotype but does buy into "we'll be happier poor than rich" nonsense. Money was only part of the marital problems. Wodehouse doesn't make a point of it, but the effect of illness on Kirk's looks would have to be an issue in a marriage that was based largely on physical attraction. I also think Bill would be a bit young to indulge in fisticuffs.
I'm surprised this was only made into a silent film since it seems like just the sort of fare that would have been popular in the 1930s, maybe with Joel McCrae and Babara Stanwyck.
Wodehouse avoids the "a real man won't live off his wife's money" stereotype but does buy into "we'll be happier poor than rich" nonsense. Money was only part of the marital problems. Wodehouse doesn't make a point of it, but the effect of illness on Kirk's looks would have to be an issue in a marriage that was based largely on physical attraction. I also think Bill would be a bit young to indulge in fisticuffs.
September 17, 2020
As a PGW fan who has read ALL his books more than once, I can honestly say that this rather long early volume is a dud. It's not a funny book at all; it's more of a melodrama or soap opera with a lot of stock characters and plot devices. It probably harkens back to his years of writing and watching musicals of the pre-1920 era. The writing is, of course, light and clear, but sadly, the wackiness that marks the best of PGW is almost entirely lacking here. This book is only for PGW "completists" who want to say they've "read them all" - but if you are new to PGW, start with the series books (Jeeves, Blandings, Mr. Mulliner) and save this for later.
January 13, 2022
I chose this particular book mostly because the first item on the Book Challenge 2022 that I am using is "Read a book... with a color in the name" and its alternative title is "The Great White Hope." (The edition I listened to was actually listed under a third title, "Their Mutual Child.")
I must admit, I was also ready for something amusing, and Wodehouse is always amusing!
It wasn't my first time through this novel, but this time I was a little more acutely aware of just how many pot shots he was taking at some of "the science" that was so popular in the time leading up to WW II: eugenics and hygenics.
It was refreshing read!
I must admit, I was also ready for something amusing, and Wodehouse is always amusing!
It wasn't my first time through this novel, but this time I was a little more acutely aware of just how many pot shots he was taking at some of "the science" that was so popular in the time leading up to WW II: eugenics and hygenics.
It was refreshing read!
December 15, 2022
A book I downloaded a while ago from Project Gutenberg. Classic Wodehouse exaggerated characters including an aunt into eugenics and sterile environments for children. Essentially the novel is a love story between the daughter of a millionaire and a bohemian artist, with some conflict and an eventual positive conclusion.
Some amusing phrasing that made me smile, but also a bit long-winded in places. Great to read once, recommended to fans of Wodehouse, but not as an introduction to this author.
Longer review here: https://suesbookreviews.blogspot.com/...
Three and a half stars, really.
Some amusing phrasing that made me smile, but also a bit long-winded in places. Great to read once, recommended to fans of Wodehouse, but not as an introduction to this author.
Longer review here: https://suesbookreviews.blogspot.com/...
Three and a half stars, really.
October 11, 2023
I really enjoyed this book. Wodehouse honestly reminded my of Lewis with his insightful comments on the inner workings of his characters' minds. I think his books are so often seen as silly diversions, that people don't know how to react when he gets serious.
I had slight traumatic flashbacks to Anna Karenina throughout, which is not something I had expected from Wodehouse. I found myself reluctant to stop - I cared about the characters and was worried about what would happen next. To add more weight to that statement, I started this book right after finishing a Sanderson novel. I would highly recommend, but just be aware that this isn't typical Wodehouse.
I had slight traumatic flashbacks to Anna Karenina throughout, which is not something I had expected from Wodehouse. I found myself reluctant to stop - I cared about the characters and was worried about what would happen next. To add more weight to that statement, I started this book right after finishing a Sanderson novel. I would highly recommend, but just be aware that this isn't typical Wodehouse.
March 18, 2018
I was searching for something fluffy to read and thought I couldn’t go wrong with my good pal, Plum. How was I supposed to know he ever went in for serious writing?
This book has Wodehouse’s signature humor all the way through it. But it also touches on some serious topics. It shows depth and feeling that are sprinkled throughout his other works, but never so clearly displayed. In many ways, I think it’s the master’s best work. But I also miss the silliness and am now going to find a Blandings novel or a Jeeves story to enjoy.
This book has Wodehouse’s signature humor all the way through it. But it also touches on some serious topics. It shows depth and feeling that are sprinkled throughout his other works, but never so clearly displayed. In many ways, I think it’s the master’s best work. But I also miss the silliness and am now going to find a Blandings novel or a Jeeves story to enjoy.
February 22, 2020
The first half of the novel is typical Wodehouse: a light comedy of two young lovers and a dragon lady of an aunt looming over, and interfering, all written in the author’s unmatched style. Part Two takes a slightly more serious tone, as the couple is now married and the husband and wife begin to doubt the wisdom of their choice of spouse and of the proper type of care for their son, Bill. All works out in the end, of course, but that is no reason not to read this delightful novel just to see how Wodehouse ties everything up perfectly, with everyone getting their rewards or comeuppances.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 115 reviews