From the Lists: #32 The Golden Bowl (Vulgar and Perverse)

What did rich people do before there was radio to keep them entertained? Well, according to Henry James' The Golden Bowl (1904), they spent their time thinking, reflecting, wondering, circumventing questions, conspiring, and teasing out the intentions of others. All of which were done as indirectly as possible to avoid the appearance of "perversion" and "vulgarity."

(Aside: Perversion and vulgarity remind me of Downton Abbey when Lady Mary asserts that if word gets out of the Turkish Ambassador dying in her bedroom, her name would henceforth become "notorious" in London social circles. Today, notoriety pays the bills for many young stars.)  

If the English people were actually as indirect as the characters in this book, it is a wonder they got anything done. These characters, as well as the author's writing style, are so indirect, so filled with commas and clauses, that I am still unsure exactly what happened in this novel. The 12 page introduction by Gore Vidal provides more insight into the action than the book; however, since literary scholarship assumes you have read the the book before you read the paper written about it, I chose to skip the introduction this time to avoid the spoiler. Silly me.

I created a diagram to help explain the relationships between the five main characters.

Based on their behavior, these characters could have been the younger versions of Dynasty characters. Of course, if Dynasty had been written by Henry James, it would have been more Twin Peaks than tawdry evening soap opera.

The book was originally envisioned as a short story or a play. However, it languished for many years as only an idea in James' journal. The Golden Bowl was eventually taken up again by James at the end of his writing career and was the last novel he published. By this time, James was dictating his novels to typists. Perhaps that is the reason it reads a bit like a long-winded lecture - without the jokes. There are seemingly endless chapters of thoughts and feelings and suspicions and what ifs, all punctuated by pervasive perhapses and howevers.

And the dialog is not much help in understanding the action. Due to the societal need to avoid directness at all costs (one would not want to be considered perverse), there are many confusing uses of pronouns for both the characters and the reader.

The dialog is often similar to the following paraphrased example:

"You must know what I am thinking," Maggie said.
"Yes, I think I do, but are you implying..." Mrs Assingham trailed off.
"I am not sure what I imply, but I have been thinking this for several months now."
"And yet?"
"And yet," Maggie responded, feeling vulgar and exposed by her candor.
"I see," Mrs. Assingham nodded, satisfied that her suspicions had been confirmed. 

Candor? What candor? Who are you talking about? What makes it worse is that even the interior dialogs are so perversely vague as to be vulgarly meaningless.

Not being familiar with the other works of Henry James, I am unsure if this book was intended to point out the inanities of British aristocratic / parlor culture of the time, to satirize contemporary novels, or if this is just his normal style. If I wanted to be generous, I would suggest that this novel sits at the pinnacle of this style; it is the Ulysses of late Edwardian writing in which all characters function as both hero and villain, tormentor and tormented, captor and captured.

Or I can just be petty and thank God I got another book off the list.

The Golden Bowl (2000 Merchant Ivory Productions)

I have added the movie to my Netflix queue. Hopefully, the moving pictures will expose the subtleties I obviously missed. (Roger Ebert's Movie Review)

Next up: #31 Animal Farm by George Orwell. I am looking forward to escaping the Ewardians for a bit of barn yard / political satire. Having read this book in high school, I am hoping to find a deeper, richer meaning today.