The Bostonians (by Henry James)
I feel as if I have to read many more critical texts on The Bostonians before I can speak intelligently about it. But I'm going to write about it anyway, because I don't happen to have any critical texts handy and what the hell.
The most interesting question to me is to wonder what James really thinks about the feminist movement, or Basil Ransom specifically. James makes Olive much less sympathetic than Basil; Olive is neurotic, sexually repressed, and selfish. Basil's dialogues with Verena at least go two ways-- there's an argument to be made that Basil treats Verena as more of an equal than Olive does. But the reader knows (and Verena knows) that what he wants is ultimately to have full control over her. (Or as James says with classic Jamesian subtlety, "he admired her enough to wish to possess her on his own terms.")
The modern reader wants Verena to pull a Kelly Taylor and "choose me," but this is not a modern novel! So instead you wait for Verena to make her own bed and then lie in it. (The last line of the novel is just perfect.) I don't know what conclusions come out of that. If nothing else, James is never simplistic about the human heart.
On a personal level, I didn't enjoy it as much as Portrait of a Lady or The Wings of the Dove, or even The Golden Bowl or Washington Square. It's not the first Henry James book that I'd recommend. But as part of his larger body of work, I think it's important to have read. And I didn't not like it. I guess I'm just a little unsettled, wondering what James is trying to tell me.
"These hours of backward clearness come to all men and women, once at least, when they read the past in the light of the present, with the reasons of things, like unobserved finger-posts, protruding where they never saw them before. The journey behind them is mapped out and figured, with its false steps, its wrong observations, all its infatuated, deluded geography." (Page 410)
The most interesting question to me is to wonder what James really thinks about the feminist movement, or Basil Ransom specifically. James makes Olive much less sympathetic than Basil; Olive is neurotic, sexually repressed, and selfish. Basil's dialogues with Verena at least go two ways-- there's an argument to be made that Basil treats Verena as more of an equal than Olive does. But the reader knows (and Verena knows) that what he wants is ultimately to have full control over her. (Or as James says with classic Jamesian subtlety, "he admired her enough to wish to possess her on his own terms.")
The modern reader wants Verena to pull a Kelly Taylor and "choose me," but this is not a modern novel! So instead you wait for Verena to make her own bed and then lie in it. (The last line of the novel is just perfect.) I don't know what conclusions come out of that. If nothing else, James is never simplistic about the human heart.
On a personal level, I didn't enjoy it as much as Portrait of a Lady or The Wings of the Dove, or even The Golden Bowl or Washington Square. It's not the first Henry James book that I'd recommend. But as part of his larger body of work, I think it's important to have read. And I didn't not like it. I guess I'm just a little unsettled, wondering what James is trying to tell me.
"These hours of backward clearness come to all men and women, once at least, when they read the past in the light of the present, with the reasons of things, like unobserved finger-posts, protruding where they never saw them before. The journey behind them is mapped out and figured, with its false steps, its wrong observations, all its infatuated, deluded geography." (Page 410)
posted by mo pie at 5:08 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home