The Readers Review: Literature from 1714 to 1910 discussion

Welcome to Week 5!

What are Basil’s feelings about Harvard, and why? What are Verena’s?

What did you think of Verena’s speech at the Burrages’?

I have a few choice words about Basil, but I’ll save them for a couple of days.

Now that we’re some way into the book, do you think James is portraying the feminists and their cause in a sympathetic light? Why or why not?

Has your opinion changed about any of the characters?

Basil and Olive both wish to control (or succeed in doing so) Verena in different ways. What do you think is best for Verena? What are her options? What does she feel about her relationship with Olive, in your opinion?

Central Park and the MOMA are mentioned in this section, and they were both very new at the time.

Lori wrote: ".. do you think James is portraying the feminists and their cause in a sympathetic light? Why or why not?"

I don't think James is portraying the feminists in a positive way at all. He hasn't even allowed the feminists to articulate clearly why women's rights and women voting rights are necessary and just. Instead he portrays them as being unlikable and susceptible to deifying Verena merely because she is physically attractive and vocally expresses simplistic ideas in an attractive manner that masks their simplicity. By their elevating form over substance, James is indicating that the feminists lack substance. Or rather than being negative, James is only interested in portraying feminism as a plot device.
James portrays many of the females, mainly Olive, as unpleasant.

Lori wrote: "I have a few choice words about Basil, but I’ll save them for a couple of days.
Basil and Olive both wish to control (or succeed in doing so) Verena in different ways. What do you think is best for Verena? What are her options? What does she feel about her relationship with Olive, in your opinion?"
In contrast to the females, James portrays Basil as pleasant and charming. Yes, he has some abhorrent Southern and chauvinistic attitudes but this time period is almost 150 years ago and these attitudes were more understood by readers of the time. In contrast to Olive, I don't think he is nearly as manipulative toward Verena. I guess you can say he is manipulative by not being as manipulative as Olive, but it is working. She does seem attracted to him at this time. I understand that Basil's borderline narcissism may lead to control and manipulation issues once he has her but, as of now, Basil is wisely letting Verena make her own decision. Olive is helping by making Basil forbidden fruit.
I think staying with Olive would be a disaster unless Verena does actually fall in love with her, in which case, everyone's happy, But that doesn't seem to be in the cards. Basil presents danger too, depending on what James does with his character. Perhaps Basil can become like another fairly cocky charmer of feminists, the character Edvard in The Odd Women and actually become attracted to Verena's feminism itself. I don't see that coming though, While I like Basil, and if they both fall in love then they should be together. but Verena would be better off falling in love with Burridge.

I thought James’s attitude about feminism was pretty well summed up in the last section (end of Book 1) when he’s reporting Verena’s thoughts: “she quite agreed with her companion that after so many ages of wrong (it would also be after the European journey) men must take their turn, men must pay!” The interpolation of the thought about going to Europe trivializes the high-minded argument very neatly. He seems pretty patronizing about the feminists’ arguments and dismissive of women’s sense of grievance. But then, aren’t many of us dismissive of other people’s sense of grievance? This gave me much food for thought going through the present set of chapters, considering its ideas in light of the political arguments in the United States today. The line from Verena’s speech—“Do you think any state of society can come to good that is based upon an organized wrong?”—still resonates.

I must say I didn’t find her talk as vapid as Basil did, though it was wordy and repetitive and relied on what he would dismiss as “emotional argument.” The part he reported certainly relied a lot on ethical principles rather than, say, economic ones, but with all the falling in love he was doing at that moment and his thoughts about Olive and her sister, he can’t have been paying strict attention. I wouldn’t take the talk at Basil’s estimation of it, and perhaps James doesn’t entirely do so either.

I don’t feel James is letting Basil off too lightly. Reporting his thoughts, he says, “she [Verena] was meant for something divinely different—for privacy, for him, for love.” It seems unclear that James actually believes that himself, though maybe I give him too much credit. Privacy is a very loaded word here because much of the opposition to gentlewomen joining the feminist movement, and politics in general, centered on how they belonged in the private sphere and going into the public sphere would coarsen them. This is a hoary old argument that was popular as far back as the eighteenth century!

And it doesn’t seem plausible that he used the word rescue lightly when he has Basil thinking, “She was a touching, ingenuous victim, unconscious of the pernicious forces which were hurrying her to her ruin. With this idea of ruin there had already associated itself in the young man’s mind, the idea—a good deal more dim and incomplete—of rescue.” It seems various characters in the book are convincing themselves that they are co-opting Verena for her own benefit.

Yeah, I think James was just reporting Basil's thoughts rather than his own opinions of the situation.

Basil prides himself on his "manners," but then he laughs at Verena when she's talking about something she cares about (and, while her feelings don't seem to run as deep as those of many of the people around her, she seems sincere in her opinions). In my opinion, that's one of the rudest things a person can do.

You’re right—like most self-centered people, he mistakes the forms of politeness for the substance. That’s why I loved the scene with Mrs. Luna at Mrs. Burrage’s gathering—two equally self-involved people pushing to get their own way! She really is the punishment Basil deserves, in my view.

Verena now says she needs Olive to help her with her speeches, just like she used to need her father. But she starts to assert herself by keeping a secret from Olive. It seems like Basil and Olive both want to possess Verena in different ways and rescue her from the other person.

Abigail wrote: "...That’s why I loved the scene with Mrs. Luna at Mrs. Burrage’s gathering—two equally self-involved people pushing to get their own way! She really is the punishment Basil deserves, in my view."

The scene was glorious.

What did you think of Verena’s speech at the Burrages’?

The interpretation of Verena’s speech by the author seems to me to be that it was nothing new, full of broad generalisations and without any suggestions of practical actions that would lead towards the achievement of women’s equality.
The main premise of the speech seemed to be that men should change their attitudes towards women, so does that mean that all the action should come from the men and not the women?

Verena’s eloquence and general stage presence was enough to elevate the speech to deserving the applause it achieved at the end. It was pointed out, however, that the same speech delivered by Olive or Mrs. Luna would have probably received no more than muted appreciation. It seems that the same speech delivered by Verena to a different group elsewhere in New York did not have such a positive reception and that was put down to the type of people they were. Rather snobbish to say the least.

Now that we’re some way into the book, do you think James is portraying the feminists and their cause in a sympathetic light? Why or why not?

I think that James is probably trying to understand the feminist movement and their goals but is not succeeding very well. To me Dr. Prance is the only true feminist in the novel so far and she may have been helped in one way or another to achieve the position she has. Mrs. Birdseye may also be included but we only know of her stories from the past. The others just want to bask in the campaigners lifestyle without getting their hands dirty. Even Olive likes to sit in the background out of the way and I don’t think that is just down to shyness.

So far I would say that he is less than sympathetic but he has provided a brutal foil in the character of Basil.

Basil and Olive both wish to control (or succeed in doing so) Verena in different ways. What do you think is best for Verena? What are her options? What does she feel about her relationship with Olive, in your opinion?

Imagine Verena trapped in a triangle. Not the eternal triangle but in that respect more of a quadruple. She is being pulled, attracted in three directions towards the physical and mental nourishment that she desires. As well as Olive and Basil, I don’t think Mr. Burrage is totally out of the frame even though Verena has refused him once. Henry, as well as being a very handsome man, provides her with the artistic pleasures and high class sophistication that the ‘epicurean’ part of her often craves for. Basil’s arrogant opposition to the cause is a challenge (in cahoots with Mrs. Birdseye) she wants to rise to, but there is also something else, something unique about him that attracts her, especially when he says such things as ’I don’t care whether I agree with you or not.’ She thinks to herself that keeping their meeting secret is no big deal yet she cuts short the trip to New York so that she doesn’t have to reveal it. Verena may be falling in love with Basil without fully recognising the condition.

Olive is rightly becoming concerned that she might be losing her grip on Verena, who, after admitting that Henry has been making love to her, proudly announces that....

’Oh, I didn’t show anything,’ said Verena, gaily. ‘I am learning to dissimulate,’ she added in a moment. ‘I suppose you have to as you go along. I pretend not to notice.’

How much dissimulation will Verena have to practise in future before human nature follows its course? Whether or not Basil is more controlling than Olive it seems that their walk through the university has sparked some resentment in Verena.

’ Well, I want to be free—to do as I think best. And, if there is a chance of my keeping it back, there mustn’t be anything more—there must not, Mr. Ransom, really.’

Henry might be best for Verena, but could he turn into a sort of Soames Forsyte and add Verena to one of his collections? Verena wants to do something useful with her life and unless Basil makes a miraculous change he probably wouldn’t allow it. Olive’s leash has been too short and Verena is pulling hard. If the leash is made longer or thrown away altogether Olive might have a chance, otherwise she will lose her.

I have to admit I have a rather hard time with this novel. I don’t really like the style of the author very much. At times it is hard to follow what is going on, the nestled sentence structure that James uses does not help. Commentaries on something that is said in a sentence right within the sentence is not very helpful (at least in my opinion). None of the characters is very likable. And James seems to see the women’s movement as a pastime for ladies, that don’t have much else to do in life; or are spinsters, that didn’t get a man. Basil is portrayed as a bit more likable, but he treats women as an accessory to men, not as beings with their own free will. I will stick with reading this, but so far I am not very taken by this book.

It’s being a bit of a chore for me too, Detlef!

Detlef wrote: "At times it is hard to follow what is going on, the nestled sentence structure that James uses does not help. Commentaries on something that is said in a sentence right within the sentence is not very helpful . . ."

James does have a difficult style. I hadn't heard the term 'nestled sentence structure' before but that is a good description of James' dense writing.
However, I do like the psychological examination he makes of his often unlikable characters. That is the reason why I keep reading him even though I usually only give his books 3 stars due to the sluggishness caused by his writing style. Or maybe I read him because I'm just a reading masochist. It's one of those two reasons.