Forging an Art

header image

 

Random Reading

Topic: books, fantasy, general fiction, historical fiction, humor, james, nonfiction, young adult|

Forget Cliff’s Notes and SparkNotes – breeze through the classics with Sarah Schmelling’s Ophelia Joined the Group Maidens Who Don’t Float.  This looked amusing as a title, but the book in hand is hilarious.  The treatment of the traditional school reading list torture, including Moby Dick and Little Women, is instructive, with valuable insight regarding characterization in particular, while maintaining snort-inducing humor.  Yes, snort-inducing.  The connections, which are key to the Facebook mindset, make real people out of some pretty cardboard characters, as Schmelling imagines interactions that never could or would happen between a variety of characters and authors.  Where else can you find references to Henry James, Jerry Seinfeld, and Mr. Roper – of Three’s Company fame/infamy – in one volume?  Actually, I don’t think I have ever seen Mr. Roper referenced before, except in TV Guide, and I don’t think that counts.

The Adventures of Amir Hamza.  This was required reading, and a long tale to boot, as are most epics.  It is rather repetitive, again, as some epics, with the usual battle, triumph, marriage/feast.  There is a particularly strange line/translation that I just can’t make sense of – “her eyebrows shot out the arrows of her eyelashes and deeply pierced his heart” and one phrase that I really like – “the crocodile of their swords.”  What a great image, and one I have not yet encountered.  I like the dust clouds that, while contrived, magically appear before or during a battle to offer an intermission, if you will, for discussion and consideration between armies and enemies.

How to Take Over Teh Wurld – this is an absolute scream.  Beyond snorting, in fact.  I can’t get enough of these great cat pictures, tagged with brilliantly hysterical captions in LOL-speak.  For someone like me, who responds to my son’s “ROFL” with “MAO” – not via email, but in everyday passing conversation, as if such an exchange could be considered conversation – this is like manna from the sky.  This sort of business keeps me sane, or insane, take your pick.  I need to get my hands on its predecessor, I Can Has Cheezburger? in order to make my life complete.

I made the mistake of re-reading Rebecca West’s Henry James. I really can’t stand Rebecca West, but I know I need to – and want to – know what others think of my man Henry.  As my coworker Miss Terri says, it’s best to know your enemy.  What an obnoxious, self-centered person this one was, too.

More required reading in the form of Efuru, the very concise tale of an African woman that leaves so much unsaid.  Nwapa’s no-nonsense prose is reminiscent of Hemingway and the iceberg; so much under the surface.  This book could be ten times as long as it is, but there is no reason for an expansion.  Efuru’s experience is understood, and the lack of bemoaning her plight or celebrating her triumph – if it is a triumph, and isn’t it pretty to think so – only adds to that which the reader can imagine.

Just finished Jacqueline Kolosov’s A Sweet Disorder, which was, well, sweet, but not as good as The Red Queen’s Daughter.  It was a bit slow to start but I knew that Kolosov would make the time investment worthwhile, and she did.  The focus on needlework made this romance particularly interesting to me, along with the relationship between embroidery and healing, both of which require strong observation and creative skills: “a man must study life if he is to master even a fraction of its complexity,” one of Miranda’s suitors notes, and in this case, it is attention to detail that allows her and other strong female characters to greater agency in their fates. 

Who else can accuse a character of “excessive barbering” but Scott Donaldson?  Just in love with his collection of essays, Fitzgerald and Hemingway: Works and Days.

 

1 Comment »

Fictional Characters, Part 2

Topic: books, general fiction|

Part 1 ended with Mary Flannery O’Connor’s Hazel Motes of the terrifyingly honest Wise Blood; Part 2 begins with . . .
#37 – Marcel of Proust’s Remembrance of Things Past.  Oh, please. I only mention this because it is one of those titles – like Infinite Jest - that people don’t actually read but carry around so others notice and say, wow, what a big book!  You must be smart/dedicated/insane/without a life.  Okay, so no one wants others thinking that last one, but you know they do, and those are the ones who believe that you are actually reading the brick.  There are some gigantic books that are so worth the time and effort (Gone With the Wind, Kristin Lavransdatter); these two are not of that persuasion.
#38 – Toad from The Wind in the Willows.  Pooh, and now Toad.  Wait for it . . .
#39 – The Cat in the Hat.  I just don’t know what to say.  I like him.  I like Toad. I like Pooh.  Dare I say again that there are no Henry James characters on this list?
#40 – Peter Pan – not too far down, not too far up.  Barrie’s flying perpetual child maintains a huge popular culture influence over 100 years after he first appeared in the Darling children’s window.
#42 – Sam Spade, of Dashiell Hammett’s The Maltese Falcon.  Hammett peopled his fiction with complicated yet simple – yes, exactly – characters who brought life to his detective tales.  Nick and Nora Charles check in at #65; fabulous fun with not a little questionable coping behaviors.
#44 – Willie Stark of All The King’s Men.  Robert Penn Warren’s masterpiece wasn’t just about Stark.  Jack Burden sure had a, well, burden to carry, and while his story ends on a happier note than Willie’s, it is at a great cost to him and those he holds close.  This is true American fiction, an exploration of identity, politics, and integrity.  Everyone should read this book, as an adolescent and then again as an adult.  It is a reminder than while the ends are important, we are also responsible for the means.
#46 – Saint-Exupery’s The Little Prince.  This poor creature is probably responsible for multiple suicides. 
#51 – Sula Peace of Toni Morrison’s Sula.  If we’re going to talk Morrison, let’s talk Pecola Breedlove of The Bluest Eye.  Let’s talk about responsibility to family; taking care of your own.  Let’s talk about looking at your own behaviors and how they affect those close to you, those you bring into the world and should protect, even at your own emotional and physical expense.  Blaming the rest of the world is easy; looking at your own faults and the damage your inflict on others is hard.  Pecola is what – and not who – happens if you don’t.
#55 – Hurston’s Janie Crawford doesn’t have enough depth to interest me.  The author’s descriptions are vivid, but the emotional draw is flat.  I’m not sure where exactly this went wrong, and although the story is interesting, the characters lack dimension.
#57 – Grendel.  For all his popularity, this monster remains all too human.
#59 – Big Brother.  Orwell is so misused. I’ll leave it at that.
#61 – Salinger’s Seymour Glass probably causes the suicides that are not directly related to the The Little Prince.
#63 – Charlotte the spider.  Do I have to indicate the book as well?  Honestly.
#66 – James Bond in Fleming’s Casino Royale.  With the background to authenticate his fiction, Fleming made Bond, who easily could have become a caricature, into a flawed being worthy of idoltry.  In the film version, Daniel Craig really picked up the latent insecurities missed by previous Bond actors who, while creating an suave icon who was above human flaw, left the third dimension at the door.
#69 – The Sound and the Fury‘s Benjy.  Quentin drops in at #97.  Why is Faulkner so far down the list?  Did these people read Sanctuary?
#75 – Ah, Babbitt arrives.  Sinclair Lewis’ title character of his 1922 novel is a bit more complex than he seems, although the same can’t be said of some of the other characters, which makes him appear as the only folded creation in a pop-up book.
#76 – Tietjens in Parade’s End.  I can’t stand Ford Madox Ford, as a writer or as a person.  I expect artists to be self-absorbed to an extent, but he made it an art form.
#77 – Frankie Addams.  Carson McCullers can drive one to The Little Prince’s end, as some of her characters are inclined, and leaving her towards the bottom quarter of the list is a travesty.  Noting only one of her characters is an even greater one.  Ignoring The Heart is a Lonely Hunter is heresy when discussing American fiction.
#84 – Yuri Zhivago of Dr. Zhivago fame.  Wow, Pasternak is incredibly boring.  I don’t know if it is just the translation or if he is as awful in the original Russian, but I can’t find the people in this book. 
#85 – Harry Potter.  I always get nailed on this one.  I haven’t read any titles of Rowling’s series because I can’t.  I tried, I really did, out of duty as a youth librarian and curiosity as well.  I don’t know that the writing is that much worse than Stephenie Meyer’s Twilight series, because I was able to muddle through those, but it is wretched.  Love Harry if you will, but I can’t.  The movies are great fun, because one doesn’t have to read Rowling’s dreadful abuse of the English language to access the story.  Call me a literary snob if you must, but good writing is good writing, whether it is literary fiction or romance or young adult.  I admit that I read some pretty trashy historical romances, but they are well written trashy historical romances.
#86 – Ondaatjie’s Hana of The English Patient doesn’t grab me the way David, Katharine, and Geoffrey do.  The author takes love and control to believable heights while drawing parallels with the political situations surrounding the trio.
#90 – Lennie Small in Steinbeck’s Of Mice and Men.  Wow, really?  At #90?  As Steinbeck’s only entry?  The Grapes of Wrath, anyone?
#93 – Kipling’s Kim.  Kipling was a genius; while much contested on grounds of his political views, the beauty of his writing, as a craft, should not be.  Whether you agree with him or not, if his characters are honest enough to upset readers, he has done his job well.
#95 – Clyde Griffiths.  I am not a Dreiser fan, and I can’t stand Sister Carrie.  He redeems himself with this absorbing and frightening story of a man without conscience.  His downward spiral – or has he always been this way, without manifesting obvious indicative behaviors? – is disturbing.  I considered An American Tragedy in book and movie format here.
#99 – Celie in Alice Walker’s The Color Purple.  I can’t stand the end of this book.  I don’t buy it, and I don’t want to.  Poor Celie deserved better from her creator.

 

No Comments »

Fictional Characters, Part 1

Topic: books, general fiction|

Seven years ago, Book magazine (which I am unable to locate now – no idea when it was discontinued) published a “100 Best Characters in Fiction Since 1900″ list (April 2002).  I discovered it in my file cabinet while cleaning earlier this summer.  It is thought provoking – of course – as well as annoying and frustrating.  Obviously, the creation of such a list is quite an undertaking, and as the article indicates, provokes a great deal of argument.  Some of those included, as well as some not included, call for attention. 

#1 – Jay Gatsby, from Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby.  I can’t argue with this one, except to say ‘uneasy lies the head . . .’ because there are a few others on the list that run a close second, if not a tie for first.  Gatsby is a heartbreaker, and more importantly, a real person.  That is not to say that Fitzgerald necessarily based him on a real person – although this was a habit – but rather that James Gatz is as real as my hands typing at the keyboard right now.  I know him; you know him; we all know him.  Sometimes I know him too well, as I recognize myself and others in him.  Fitzgerald was a wizard in the characterization department; Gatsby is one of the many products of his magic.
#2 – Salinger’s Holden Caulfied.  Well, Holden has his time and place, and we’ve all been there and done that.  We all pass through the same developmental stages; how we manage them, and what circumstances surround our experience make us who we are, and Holden is there to hold a torch for those of us who fear that we aren’t “normal” or “right.” 
#3 – Nabokov’s Humbert Humbert.  It’s all about the empathy here, and Nabokov knew the language well enough to create droves of it for this genuinely disturbed character.  I am amazed every time I return to Lolita by the fullness of the characters, as well as the depth of Humbert’s immersion in his own perverse, but terrifyingly understandable world.  Lolita herself appears as #14, but I don’t think she qualifies to the list, period.  It’s all about the Hum.
#4, 8, 9 – James Joyce – doesn’t matter which characters, I don’t remember them, and I couldn’t care less.  His short stories are good enough, but the rest . . . ugh.  Never could understand his appeal. As John Dos Passos said of a Joyce production, “the hero doesn’t seem to me remarkable particularly.” Across the board.  It helps to have one’s opinion validated by the great Dos.
#7, #24, #81 – Atticus, Scout and Boo, To Kill a Mockingbird.  Yes, I am on the bandwagon with these. 
#10 – Wharton’s Lily Bart – wait a minute, I don’t see any Henry James creations on this list.  Sure, he only gave us a handful of novels and stories after the turn of the century, but if Miss Bart is present, surely Maggie Verver, Charlotte Stant, Marie de Vionnet, Kate Croy, Nan Midmore – yes, Nan, thank you very much – deserve a place on this list.  And Newland Archer, #94 – nope.  Move over, buddy.
#12 – Gregor Samsa – Kafka does not do it for me.  He stops in again at #83 with The Trial’s Joseph K.  Still doesn’t do it for me.
#16, #19 – Woolf’s Dalloway and Mrs. Ramsay.  I’m not big on Woolf, but her stream of consciousness narratives do work for me.  Some scholars/readers/people in general claim that she ‘invented’ such a narrative device, but this isn’t true.  William James was the first to note this method and to use this phrase; Faulkner, I believe, is the master of it.
#20 – Richard Wright’s Bigger Thomas.  Wright makes characterization seem effortless; and yes, Bigger is remarkable and memorable, but of the two, I think Fishbelly of The Long Dream made me a believer in Wright’s talent and brilliance.  I was surprised at how well I knew and understood Fishbelly, someone completely different from me in every possible way.  Or maybe he isn’t . . . this is what Wright made me consider, and continue to consider.
#21, #47, #53 – all Hemingway: Nick Adams, Santiago, and Jake Barnes.  Yes, but what about Robert Jordan?
#23 – Scarlett O’Hara.  Yes, definitely, and the book version, please, not Vivien Leigh.
#26 – Kurtz from Conrad’s Heart of Darkness.  At least it isn’t Jim of Lord Jim.  I think if we’re going to do Conrad, it should be Marlow, who steps in at #98.  Let’s switch Kurtz with Marlow and the world will make sense again.
 #27 – Stevens, the butler from Ishiguro’s The Remains of the Day.  Speaking of Ishiguro, I’d say Kathy, Ruth and Tommy of Never Let Me Go should be here instead.  NLmG gave me nightmares for weeks.  I am still unsure if it has found a place in my head yet, a comfortable one, that is.
#29 – Winnie the Pooh.  I am not sure how to respond to this one.  Who doesn’t like this silly bear, but really, I must reiterate that there are no Henry James characters on this list.  But Pooh is here, at #29.  Shaking my head.
#31 – Oh, yes, Hazel Motes of Flannery O’Connor’s Wise Blood.  She has a variety of highly memorable and disturbing characters to choose from; Motes is perfect here, but the list should include some of her other frighteningly real and honest attention-grabbers.

 . . .  to be continued

 

No Comments »

The Awkward Oates: Why Judith Reads James

Topic: books, general fiction, james, short stories|

 The Awkward Oates: Why Judith Reads James
presented at The Fourth International Conference of the
Henry James Society, July 2008

Joyce Carol Oates’s short story “My Warszawa: 1980” follows the journey of well-respected academician Judith Horne as she travels to and within Poland to participate in an international conference on American culture.  She has a vague connection to Poland, with remote family members who were killed in Auschwitz and a Jewish ancestry that can be seen in her features, but she considers these facts unimportant to who she is at the moment.  She travels with her lover, who is as remote emotionally as her dead forbears are physically.  The emotional connections she makes with the people and land begin to affect her well-ordered and controlled life, including her relationship with him.  As they sit side by side on the plane to Poland, he attends to his work as journalist, typewriter on his lap, and Judith gazes at the landscape, an opened book on hers.  It is Henry James’s The Awkward Age, unread, chosen by Judith with a logic she cannot recall.  Why does Oates give James to Judith, and why does she choose this novel in particular to influence her?  Nanda’s story is a warning to Judith, a red flag that unfolds as the younger girl’s ruin proceeds before her eyes, and Judith realizes that the man she loves will never marry her, just as Vanderbank refuses to propose to Nanda.  Neither man is comfortable with a woman who is corrupted by knowledge that might undermine his need for authority in the relationship.  Nanda understands her position too late, but Judith has time to reflect on her situation, and Oates leaves the story unfinished, with Judith on a plane home with Carl but not definitively resigned to the relationship.

In 1980, Oates and her husband completed a six-week tour of Eastern Europe that included a demanding schedule of sixteen public appearances.  The notes she took during this trip became several of the short stories that comprise the collection Last Days (1984), including “My Warszawa: 1980.”  Biographer Greg Johnson mentions the awareness of her own Jewish heritage that began to affect Oates during this visit, so it is clear that Judith’s experience is based on that of Oates.  Oates, however, does not document a breakdown or anything close to a breakdown during her travels, although she does lament the need to perform and the stress that comes with performance, a lethargy that comes with Judith’s experience as well.

James’s documented influence on Oates makes his work obvious reading material for a character based on her.  In a 1978 Paris Review interview, she includes him on a list of authors who have influenced her, and in an interview with Library Journal six years earlier she exclaims “I love Henry James.  I love Henry James so much.”  She has called him “a serious writer” and wishes that “we could truly see into James’s head.”  She rewrote The Turn of the Screw twice, and she says of her 1972 version, it is a “testament of my love and extreme devotion” to the original author.  Her short story “The Sacred Marriage” is clearly a revision of The Aspern Papers, and Christopher Newman, she reveals, influenced the characters in Bellefleur.  She collects rare first editions of James’s work, and in her journal records praise for James’s preface to The Princess Casamassima: “how beautifully James puts it! I felt a kinship to him at once.”  In a 1993 Playboy interview, she was asked to consider who she would choose to play her in a movie version of her life, and offered,  “the ghost of Henry James,” a “great master, he’s up there, he’s like Shakespeare.”  Her idol appears in her most recent short story collection, Wild Nights!, which imagines the final days of several famous authors she believes worthy of attention.  Judith with James makes sense, and The Awkward Age is the best influence because of the similarities to Judith’s situation.

In “My Warszawa: 1980,” Judith travels to Poland to complete a ten day lecture tour on contemporary American culture.  She is respected and courted by the Polish writers and students who see her as a savior amidst the Polish government’s restrictions on their own work.  Everyone thinks she is severe and unemotional, and “persons – almost always men” are “bitterly jealous of her reputation” (433).  Judith fulfills her obligations as expected, but along the way becomes disillusioned with her relationship with Carl, who has been her lover for ten years, or, Judith considers, maybe twelve.  He accompanies her but is preoccupied with his own work and does not attend her lectures.  He is not too busy, however, to tell her how she should behave or how she should feel.  She is unable to confide in him her upset over the destruction of the Polish Jews during the Holocaust or of her growing emotional attachment to her guides and the land itself, although she makes several attempts to do so.  He accuses her of becoming “unbalanced” and sentimental about the past, and their arguments lead her to realize the distance that has always existed between them.  His refusal to commit to her is her primary concern, and she feels like she has waited all those years for nothing.  Unlike her revision of The Turn of the Screw, in which Oates aims to find a conclusion to the original, this story is left unresolved, and Judith’s decision regarding her relationship with Carl remains a mystery.

Judith and Nanda are haunted, in a sense, by ancestors they have never met, both to their benefit and detriment. Weeks before the trip, Carl wonders if Judith will be upset by a visit to Warsaw.  She is immediately offended: “as if she were Jewish – a Jewess!” (436).  Her ancestry becomes an issue of blood and guilt, one she has no time to consider, as she does not believe herself religious.  Her Polish hosts, however, are fascinated by her Jewish appearance (kinky hair; dark, uneasy eyes) and her Biblical Hebrew name.  Her family history is visible to others and an influence on their behavior towards her, much like Nanda’s resemblance to her grandmother affects Longdon’s treatment of her.  Nanda has never known Lady Julia, but without the affection Longdon remembers for her grandmother, Nanda would not have the opportunity he provides for her when Vanderbank rejects her.  Both women inherit acceptance among those who revere their predecessors, Judith with the Poles and Nanda with Longdon, but the men they love remain disinterested.  In Nanda’s case, the social ideals set in her grandmother’s time are those to which Vanderbank holds her, so Judith, reading about Nanda’s unknowing failure to adhere to outdated standards, considers that her family history might not be something that would enhance her relationship with Carl.  She downplays the affect her connections with the Holocaust have on her, and does not feel comfortable confiding her feelings about it to him.

Judith and Nanda choose reading material that undermines their romantic (or potentially romantic) relationships. Judith reads The Awkward Age at night in the hotel room she shares with Carl.  One evening when he is out at a meeting, she is alone with the book, considering her future.  She realizes that she has “fastened her thoughts helplessly” (454) on a man who does not love her in return.  She is “humiliated by her love for him” (449).  Nanda does the same, reserving her affections for Vanderbank, who ultimately leaves her waiting for a marriage proposal that he will never offer.  Carl questions Judith about the book, and comments that James is “heartbreaking” if you read him “correctly” (461).  When she assures him that she reads most books “correctly” he agrees, adding sarcastic remarks about her superior intelligence, calling her “the queen” and the “star of the conference.”  He is obviously jealous of her success, and Judith tries to discuss this with him.  He walks away as she insists, “you are jealous.  Don’t deny it” (469).  Like Vanderbank, he is threatened by a woman whose knowledge is equal or superior to his own.  Vanderbank makes a point of telling Nanda that her mother is a “fixed star,” and that her “intelligence . . . will always have a price” (385).  Carl’s notion of reading this particular novel “correctly” implies that he has read it and is concerned that she understands Nanda’s loss as a direct result of her intelligence.  Nanda’s loss of Vanderbank and the possibility of marriage and motherhood in general is heartbreaking if that is what a reader believes a woman needs to be happy.  Her knowledge has led to this downfall, so that same reader would necessarily agree that knowledge ruins innocence, is a threat to male authority, and a barrier to a woman’s happiness.  Judith’s “correct” reading of the novel means something very different than Carl’s.  She is “poisoned” by the story much like Nanda is ruined by reading Vanderbank’s dirty French novel.  While Nanda’s reading material makes her unfit for Vanderbank, Judith’s makes Carl unfit for her.  The social knowledge provided by their books, in both cases, allows the women to see other options for their futures, although those futures will not include the romantic marriages they want and expect because the partners they prefer do not value them enough to deserve them.

Books are not the only poisonous influences on Nanda and Judith’s carefully constructed environments.  While the Duchess points out that Nanda’s social environment is a “mal’aria” (195) (reminiscent of Daisy Miller’s physical and social ailments), and Longdon notes that the girl breathes “a different air” (115) than her socially perfect grandmother, Judith recognizes a physical threat and eventually, the emotional one, on her own, shortly after her arrival in Poland.  At first, the “layers of smoke-cloud” (437) that collect from constant cigarette smoking and poor ventilation make her sick.  The odor of fried onions and potatoes become her constant companions, hanging thickly in the air of the hotel, meeting rooms, and restaurants along with the smoke.  Even the student guides cough as they wave their cigarettes in the air to punctuate conversation.  As Judith’s attempts to communicate with Carl are stifled, he eventually shifts the blame for their problems on the physical environment: “we’ve been poisoned by this place” (470).  Instead of taking responsibility for his part in the failure of the relationship, Carl uses the physical and political climate of the country as convenient scapegoats.  The students and academics in Poland, desperate for public and personal freedom, cling to their American counterparts pathetically, which makes Judith’s experience more stressful, but Carl’s refusal to consider that he might also be a cause of her distress tells her that her acceptance of a role created by Carl in order to satisfy his own needs and expectations, while ignoring hers, has poisoned her potential happiness within the relationship.  Like Vanderbank, Carl maintains a “high moral tone” (433) that is unwavering in spite of the pain he so obviously causes the woman he claims to admire.  Judith considers that amidst the pollution and filth in the city, a more political and personal contaminant is in the air, echoed by the whispers and soft pleas of Polish attendees at parties and meetings: “the very air is poisoned” (451).  Her bloodshot eyes notice the stained bathroom tiles in the hotel, the preponderance of brown teeth in the desperate smiles of tour guides, and the dirty ashtrays that litter tables everywhere.  Nanda remains innocently unaware of the miasma created by the inappropriate speech and behavior of her mother’s social set until it is too late.  When Judith recognizes that her romantic situation is similar to Nanda’s, she is encouraged to struggle against the weight of it, painful as such a process proves to be, so that she might avoid the same fate.

Judith works her resistance with language, a medium in which she is expert and expects to feel comfortable, if not superior, while Nanda remains innocent in the midst of the word games and indirect speech of her mother’s friends.  Judith’s attempts to communicate with the Poles are thwarted by the language difference, although the students and professionals she meets use a passable English.  She finds the Polish language inaccessible and frustrating, and experiences a physical distress at the sound of it.  This frustration is reflected in her conversations with Carl, during which she asks for clarity and simplicity regarding the terms of their relationship, and his responses, when he cares to respond, are the opposite. “Don’t speak in riddles” (439), she insists, irritated by his evasive speech.  Longdon, like Judith, begs for explanations, lost in a social whirl so different from that which he knew years ago, but Nanda never considers that there is something to question or clarify.  Judith finds that “it is unnerving to journey into a country whose language is so very foreign” (441), referring as much to the emotional and personal life she has ignored for so long as the external, physical experience in Poland.  She repeatedly tells Carl, “I don’t understand” but his reply is always “are we arguing?” as if arguing would be unacceptable in his vision of a romantic relationship.  Like Vanderbank, he avoids the question, instead “rummaging” and “rooting” to change the subject, refusing to acknowledge his partner’s needs.  Vanderbank, who confesses himself noisy as a dozen birds during his final meeting with Nanda, is never pressed directly by her about his feelings and intentions towards her, but Judith wants more control over her future than Nanda has over hers.  She accuses Carl of substituting empty words for other words that are more emotionally invested, such as “I love you” or “I hate you” and insists that he does not love her after proclaiming that she in fact loves him.  Her declaration of love prompts a lukewarm response: “Oh you, do you? Do you?” (468)  He smiles coldly and she soon comes to a point Nanda never reaches: “I won’t demean myself for nothing! – for you!” (469)

Nanda’s family and friends leave her clueless about her pending troubles, but Judith is warned.  Rushing to one of the many meetings she attends during her stay, Judith, understandably distracted, nearly walks into a glass door.  She thinks it is an automatic door and pays no attention to it until one of her guides calls to her in warning.  Near the end of their trip, Carl walks into such a door as Judith watches, “without love,” unable or unwilling to stop him, and does not move towards him after he slams against the glass and is hurt.  Nanda slams against the “polished glass” (373) that divides her and Vanderbank, but does not want to bring up her distress at the indefinite nature of their relationship because it would be like “forcing a disfigurement or hurt” (380) on him.  Judith has no such concern for Carl.  She is forewarned, not only by her Polish guide but by her Jamesian one as well.  Longdon assures Nanda that she has “a margin for accidents, for disappointments and recoveries” (113) because of her age and inexperience.  Judith, like Longdon, has no such margin.  She worries that like Nanda, she has “outlived the period of her availability” (453).  Unlike Nanda, she does not have to make a definite decision regarding her unwed state.  While Mrs. Brookenham insists “we see our mistakes too late” (237), Judith sees hers before it is too late to correct.

Works Consulted

James, Henry. The Awkward Age. London: Heinemann, 1899.

Johnson, Greg. Invisible Writer: A Biography of Joyce Carol Oates. New York: Dutton, 1998.

Oates, Joyce Carol. Conversations with Joyce Carol Oates. Ed. Greg Johnson. New York: Ontario Rev. P, 2006.

—. Conversations with Joyce Carol Oates. Ed. Lee Milazzo. Jackson, Miss.: UP of Mississippi, 1989.

—. The Journal of Joyce Carol Oates 1973-1982. Ed. Greg Johnson. New York: Ecco-Harper, 2007.

—. “My Warszawa: 1980.” High Lonesome: New & Selected Stories 1966-2006. New York: Ecco-Harper, 2006.

 

No Comments »

Newport Experience

Topic: james|

*Good things about the Newport trip:
the actual conference
swimming, collecting shells, and watching small children scoop jellyfish into their buckets at Gooseberry Beach
the Cliff Walk, and the surfers in the mornings 
the Redwood Library, the oldest lending library in America
amazing food and service (and entertaining and enlightening dinner companions) at the White Horse Tavern
the stunning architecture of the Newport Casino, and having dinner out by the lawns of the International Tennis Hall of Fame with an expert on said architecture
a Denny Hamlin look-a-like at O’Hare 
the bus tour, led by the opening keynote, James Yarnall (a La Farge scholar), which included sites personally relevant to James and his family and friends
peppermint stick ice cream at the Newport Creamery 
the purple water on the shore of Easton’s Beach
 

*Bad things about the Newport trip:
trolleys in Newport are never on time
vapid girls from U.S. Concepts who rode the shuttle with me from the airport to the city; I have never heard the words “mani,” “pedi,” and “Kashi” used so much within a forty-five minute period
the people (or something like) who sat beside me on the planes
the ‘accommodations’ in the freshman dorm, including the nonstop air conditioning and a window shade that would not stay down; I had to tie it to a chair
bad food and lousy service at the Red Parrot, as well as a patron at the table beside me who kept blowing her nose obnoxiously

 
  

 

No Comments »

Next Five Books

Topic: fantasy, general fiction, nonfiction, young adult|

Our cat friend checks out my next five books.  Yes, I know it was supposed to be six, but five plus one is too much math for me.  I should have asked my eight year old for help.

 

2 Comments »