There's an Internet Archive version of the book if you can't find it at your local library.
Welcome to the first week of the Cool Bloggers Book Club (CBBC) where we will be discussing the Pulitzer Prize winning The Age of Innocence by Edith Wharton! CBBC makes it sound like this is some exclusive club, but anyone can join, blogger or not. You're already cool if you're here. I'm happy you are here and making this journey with all of us. As always, the ground rules for CBBC are:
1) Don't apologize. Don't apologize for having a lot or a little to say in the comments. Don't apologize because you're not an expert on something. Don't apologize because you don't have a doctorate in English literature. Don't apologize if you fall behind or can't keep up. Have fun and say what you have to say. You and your thoughts are important.(If you need more information on this, see my post on Foster's How To Read Literature Like a Professor.)
2) Feel free to come back and respond to comments more than once! I love it when there's a dialogue in the comments.
3) Have fun reading, thinking about the book, and discussing it! Don't feel limited to my discussion prompts - talk about whatever you feel like talking about.
*******************
Who was Edith Wharton?
Edith Wharton was born Edith Newbold Jones in New York City in 1862. Her family was mad rich, yo. Wharton's paternal family, the Joneses, were a very wealthy and socially prominent family, having made their money in real estate. The saying "keeping up with the Joneses" is said to refer to her father's family. She was born during the Civil War, so her family traveled to Europe after the war in part because of the depreciation of American currency. From 1866 to 1872, the Jones family visited France, Italy, Germany, and Spain. At the age of nine, she suffered from typhoid fever, which nearly killed her, while the family was at a spa in the Black Forest. After the family returned to the United States in 1872, they spent their winters in New York City and their summers in Newport, Rhode Island.
At age 17, Edith Jones “came out” into society, making the rounds of dances and parties in Newport and New York, observing the rituals of her privileged world, a world she would later skewer in her fiction. Her childhood ended with the death of her father in March of 1882, followed by two romantic disappointments. Still unmarried at the age of 23, Edith was rapidly approaching “old maid” status. In 1885 she married Edward (Teddy) Robbins Wharton. Though imperfectly suited for each other, the couple filled their early married years with travel, houses, and dogs.
While living in Newport, Wharton honed her design skills, co-authoring (with Ogden Codman, Jr.) her first major book, a surprisingly successful non-fiction work on design and architecture, The Decoration of Houses (1897).
In 1901, eager to escape Newport, Wharton bought 113-acres in Lenox, then designed and built a manse called The Mount, which you can go tour today. Hey, do we have any Massachusetts readers who could go visit?
The Whartons would live at The Mount for ten years. Here she would write some of her greatest works, including The House of Mirth (1905) and Ethan Frome (1911) while her marriage disintegrated under the weight of Teddy Wharton’s chronic depression and Edith's affair with Morton Fullerton, an author and foreign correspondent for The Times of London. The Whartons sold The Mount in 1911, and they divorced in 1913. Edith Wharton moved permanently to France and Teddy returned to his sister’s home. Teddy died in 1928.
In 1914, when World War I broke out, Edith Wharton was wealthy, famous, recently divorced, and living in her favorite city, Paris. Instead of withdrawing to the safety of England or returning to the United States, Wharton chose to stay and devote herself to creating a complex network of charitable and humanitarian organizations. In 1916, Wharton received the French Legion of Honor for her war work.
At the end of the war, Wharton moved out of Paris to Pavillon Colombe, a suburban villa in the village of St.Brice-sous-Forêt. In 1921, her novel of old New York, The Age of Innocence, won the Pulitzer Prize for fiction. In 1920 she acquired Château Ste. Claire, a restored convent in the south of France. For the rest of her life, she divided her time between these two homes, devoted to her friends and dogs, writing prolifically, traveling, and gardening. Look, I gotta be honest, Edith Wharton's life sounds pretty great to me!
She died on August 11, 1937, age 75 at Pavillon Colombe. She is buried, in the Cimetière des Gonards in Versailles, close to her good friend Walter Berry.
*******************
What happened in these chapters?
(Friends, I've never read this book. I have no idea what's important and what's not, so this is quite detailed.)
We open at the opera when Newland Archer (WTF kind of name is that?) arrives late. He eyeballs a young girl in the box across from his and it turns out this girl is May Welland, his soon-to-be-fiancée. A scandalously dressed woman appears in the box with May and her family and it's May's cousin Countess Ellen Olenska.
In a ball held at the Beaufort house after the opera, May and Archer announce their engagement. Countess Olenska did not come to the ball.
Then May and Archer start on betrothal visits, which sound kind of nightmarish to me. Archer heads over to the Mingott place and Mrs. Mingott approves of the betrothal. Towards the end of the visit, Countess Olenska shows up. She was *gasp* with Mr. Beaufort who walked her home in broad daylight. Mrs. Mingott doesn't seem to notice anything untoward about this, but Archer has thoughts.
Meanwhile, Mr. Sillerton Jackson goes to the Archer place for dinner where the food is terrible because Mrs. Archer doesn't spend her money foolishly on things like food. They gossip over Countess Olenska - did she have an affair with her husband's secretary and/or is her husband an absolute beast? Archer ends up saying "Women ought to be free - as free as we are" (Chapter 5) because he feels the need to defend his fiancée's family. Archer takes to his study to have a think about the whole situation.
Meanwhile, the Mingotts invite people to their home to meet Ellen Olenska, but most of them decline. The social ramifications are intense! Archer has his own mother appeal to Louisa van der Luyden, a real shaker and OG NY family. The van der Lyudens chat things over and say they will support Countess Olenska by inviting her to their reception for the Duke of St. Austrey.
We learn more about Olenska's background - her parents died and she was left to be cared for by her irresponsible and feckless aunt, Medora Manson. She married a Polish count, the marriage ended under less than great circumstances, and now Olenska is back with the comfort of her family. She attends the van der Luyen's reception for the Duke, but arrives late and somewhat disheveled and commits the faux pas of leaving the Duke's side to go to talk to Archer.
The next day Archer goes to visit Olenska, but she's not there, so he nosily pokes around her stuff. Once she arrives, they talk about New York society and she cries because she doesn't understand the norms. When Archer takes his leave, he sends flowers to both May and the Countess.
He and May are walking in the park the next discussing their long engagement. Archer wants it shorter. He also muses on how she doesn't seem to be able to be able to think for herself. When he gets home, his sister Janey bursts in to tell him that Countess Olenska had been at Mrs. Lemuel Struthers' party the previous night. Mrs. Struthers is a social climbing commoner. As Archer argues with his family as to the impropriety of Olenska's actions, Mr. Henry van der Luyden is announced. He has just called on Countess Olenska to tactfully warn her about following the Duke to certain common parties.
*******************
All pages numbers are from the Internet Archive version linked above.
Hat mentions (why hats?):
"I wonder if she wears a round hat or a bonnet in the afternoon," Janey speculated. (page 37)
Beaufort stood, hat in hand, saying something...(page 70)
he saw the familiar tall-hatted figures lounging behind the plateglass (page 82)
smoothed his tall hat shyly (page 87)
laid his hat and gloves on the floor beside him in the old-fashioned way (page 87)
*******************
Things I looked up:
Christine Nilsson (page 1) - she was a real Swedish opera singer (1843-1921)
droit de cite (page 17) - citizenship; acceptance
enfilade (page 19) - a suite of rooms with doorways in line with each other
bouton d'or (page 19 and 20) - buttercup - I looked up what wallpaper might look like with this as a motif since wallpaper would have been a growing fad among some people in the 1870s
.png){kind=spacer}
Love Victorious by Bouguereau (page 20) - Adolphe-William Bouguereau (1825-1905), a French painter who won the Prix de Rome in 1850, was well known for his nudes. Bouguereau never painted a painting called Love Victorious, but it’s thought that Wharton may have had this one in mind, Le Printemps (The Return of Spring), painted in 1886.
 |
| Le Printemps |
Marble Faun (page 31) - The Marble Faun: Or, The Romance of Monte Beni, also known by the British title Transformation, was the last of the four major romances by Nathaniel Hawthorne, and was published in 1860. The Marble Faun is set in a fantastical Italy. The romance mixes elements of a fable, pastoral, gothic novel, and travel guide.
Ouida's novels (page 31) - Maria Louise Ramé (1839-1908), going by the name Marie Louise de la Ramée and known by the pseudonym Ouida, was an English novelist. Ouida wrote more than 40 novels, as well as short stories, children's books and essays. Moderately successful, she lived a life of luxury, entertaining many of the literary figures of the day.
enbonpoint (page 32) - the plump or fleshy part of a person's body, in particular a woman's bosom; most often used to describe people of heavy, but not unattractive, girth. It derives from "en bon point," a phrase from Middle French that means "in good condition."
Gainsborough's Lady Angelica du Lac (page 49) - Thomas Gainsborough (1727-1788) was an English portrait and landscape painter, draughtsman, and printmaker. Along with his rival Sir Joshua Reynolds, he is considered one of the most important British artists of the second half of the 18th century. This particular painting appears to be fictitious.
Esther interceding with Ahasuerus (page 55) - From chapters 5-7 in the Old Testament book of Esther, in which Esther intercedes with King Ahasuerus to spare the Jews. The king had taken Esther as his wife, not knowing she was Jewish, but when his councilor Haman decreed that all Jews in the Persian empire should be massacred, Esther intervened on behalf of her people and the king granted her request.
 |
| Intercession of Esther with King Ahasuerus and Haman by Pietro Paolini (1603-1681) |
Buhl furniture (pages 19 and 69) - brass, tortoiseshell, or other material cut to make a pattern and used for inlaying furniture
vitrine (page 69) - glass display case
symbolic meaning of lily of the valley and yellow roses (page 77) - Lily of the valley symbolize humility, purity, and the return of happiness. Yellow roses primarily symbolize friendship, joy, warmth, and platonic affection, serving as a cheerful gesture of caring, congratulations, or "welcome back"
Swinburne's Chastelard (page 83) - a play by Algernon Charles Swinburne, first published in 1865, that dramatizes the doomed love affair between the French poet Pierre de Boscosel de Chastelard and Mary, Queen of Scots, set in the 16th-century Scottish court
Contes Drolatiques (page 83) - usually translated Droll Stories, is a collection of humorous short stories by the French writer Honoré de Balzac, based on Giovanni Boccaccio's The Decameron and influenced by François Rabelais. The stories are written in pastiche Renaissance French; although the title promises a hundred, only thirty were published, in groups of ten in 1832, 1833, and 1837.
*******************
Lines of notes:
Though there was already talk of the erection (page 1) - Look, I know I have the sensibilities of a teenage boy, but this was the second sentence of the book and I was giggling.
He hated to think of May Welland's being exposed to the influence of a young woman so careless of the dictates of Taste. (page 12) - Oh, Archer. You're such a twat.
The Beauforts' house was one of the few in New York that possessed a ball-room (it antedated even Mrs. Manson Mingott's and the Headly Chiverses) ; and at a time when it was beginning to be thought "provincial" to put a "crash" over the drawing-room floor and move the furniture upstairs, the possession of a ballroom that was used for no other purpose, and left for three-hundred-and-sixty-four days of the year to shuttered darkness, with its gilt chairs stacked in a corner and its chandelier in a bag; this undoubted superiority was felt to compensate for whatever was regrettable in the Beaufort past. (page 16) - Who here wants a ballroom in their house to make up for their regrettable past of financial shenanigans? *raises hand sheepishly*
The immense accretion of flesh which had descended on her in middle life like a flood of lava on a doomed city had changed her from a plump active little woman with a neatly-turned foot and ankle into something as vast and august as a natural phenomenon. (page 25) - Mean.
What could he and she really know of each other, since it was his duty, as a "decent" fellow, to conceal his past from her, and hers, as a marriageable girl, to have no past to conceal? (page 41) - Archer, you're still a twat.
She was straightforward, loyal and brave; she had a sense of humor (chiefly proved by her laughing at his jokes) ; and he suspected, in the depths of her innocently-gazing soul, a glow of feeling that it would be a joy to waken. (page 43) - Do I have to say it again? Archer, you're a twat.
The young man felt that his fate was sealed : for the rest of his life he would go up every evening between the cast-iron railings of that greenish-yellow doorstep, and pass through a Pompeian vestibule into a hall with a wainscoting of varnished yellow wood. (page 69) - Cry me a river.
*******************
Questions to ponder:
1) I haven't read this before. If you haven't read it before, what do you think is going to happen in the rest of this book?
2) Okay, I know I repeatedly said Archer is a twat. But I do appreciate that he's honest with May. He was supposed to tell Olenska about their engagement, he didn't, but he fessed up to her. He sent Olenska flowers and I thought for sure he'd hide it from her, but he didn't. So while I think he's a twat of his time and place in society, he's also being up front about some stuff. What do you think of this characterization of Newland Archer?
3) The young man was sincerely but placidly in love. (page 43)
"May is a darling; I've seen no young girl in New York so handsome and so intelligent. Are you very much in love with her?"
Newland Archer reddened and laughed. "As much as a man can be." (page 61)
Consider the above two quotes, along with Archer's musings over how perfect May looks, but also how she doesn't seem to be a critical thinker. What do you think Archer really thinks about May? What do you think May thinks about Archer? Who wants to read this book from May or Mrs. Mingott's POV?
4) What role is New York high society playing in this book? Which is to say, how do you think this book would be different if Archer and May were two kids living in the same neighborhoods Francie Nolan would end up?
*******************
Homework for you: How are you reading this book? Paperback, ebook, audiobook, though the Internet archive? Where are you reading it? If you have a photo of your book (maybe you're reading it on the beach!) you'd like to share with the rest of the group, send it in and I'll make a collage for next week. Deadline for sending it in to make next week's post is 1/7 by noon central. dominique 100 at hotmail dot com
*******************
Upcoming CBBC schedule:
Monday, February 16: Chapters 19-26
Monday, February 23: Chapter 27-34
Monday, March 2: Wrap-up
I never read this before- I think Newland will fall for The countess and yearn from afar because he doesn't have the guts to go against his rigid society's dictates, all those unwritten codes that are so hypocritical.
ReplyDelete2) I think he's a flimsy shallow jerk with nascient decent feelings underneath the suffocating coat of his upbringing. He's surrounded by self-righteous prigs and shallow jerks. He should just say what he means and live life freely like Mrs Mingott.
3) I think May is playing the game and acts exactly like she thinks he wants her to be. She's nice enough but canny in saying and doing what Newland expects. She's a smooth operator. She knows exactly what Newland is - She's grown up in the same rarified atmosphere. I'd rather see how Mrs Mingott would see this tale- she lives within society but without crushing her own personality.
4) If they were middle class, it would play out the same. They'd follow the dictates of their social class. If they were lower class, Newland would dump May and run off with Ellen. Or May would dump him and tell him not to be a twit and go to her cousin.
I got my book from the library- hard copy.
Oh, May as a smooth operator! So interesting. That is NOT how I've been reading her. I need to definitely read her character more deeply.
DeleteI think Newland is going to do more than admire the Countess from afar. I think he's going to hit that! (Is that crude? I don't know.)
Edith Wharton's life does sound pretty dope! I wonder how many dogs she had.
ReplyDeleteMy favorite part of the book is that I can see the influence on The Gilded Age TV show. My least favorite is everything else...I'm not bonding with any of the characters, and it all sounds pretty boring. But I'm keeping an open mind, and it's fun to hang out with the group.
I don't know how many dogs she had, but one of the Wikipedia photos had her holding a dog and if I ever had a Wikipedia article, that's what I'd want. I mean, all in all, her life sounds pretty good? That's interesting since so many authors have so much drama and trauma.
DeleteI don't know if I'm loving it, either, but I'm willing to keep my mind opened. Maybe something exciting and unpredictable will happen.
I loved the details about EW's life! My copy of the book has an introduction, but I skipped it to get right to the story- maybe if I'd read the intro I would have known all those things. I'm glad she had such a good life. It seems like too often authors die poor and unappreciated.
ReplyDeleteThis is a reread for me. I read it the first time in my 20s and LOVED it. It's interesting to reread it now. For one thing, somehow I was much more sympathetic to Archer the first time around. This time I agree he's a twat. I'm thinking we'll like him more as the book goes on. It's also interesting how slow this book is, compared to most of the books we read now. Back then I read a lot of classics, so I guess I was used to it. I can see how someone would think this is boring. But keep with it! I really loved this book, and there's a line at the end that I found so moving, I remember it to this day (I'll say what it is when we get there!)
Oh, I'm glad people enjoyed EW's background. I was really into it and kept going into the weeds. Poor Amy Tan's intro was like two paragraphs. LOL.
DeleteI don't know if this is boring, per se, but it's just relying on social cues that I don't really understand. Wharton does spell some of it out, but sometimes I just don't know what inferences I'm supposed to be making and that's frustrating. I think that also might be a *me* problem.
It is not a you problem. I am having a hard time grasping all the subtle hints and colorings of the society.
DeleteOne of the things I read about Wharton's life is that, as a child, she hated having other children around to play with for very long. She used to go to her mother, almost in tears, and beg her to send them home so that she could "play pretend by herself." She had a very vivid imagination and felt hemmed in by children her own age.
ReplyDeleteYou commented on Newland Archer's name: this is one of the most telling aspects of the book, and aside from the symbolism of it, I love how all the people in the book have recycled names so that they can show how they come from the prominent families of New York. They keep naming their kids with Old Family names in some combination. Ellen mentions playing with a cousin named Vandie--of course that is short for Van der Luyden. Can you imagine being a kid with that name? But it was The Way Things Were Done in order to preserve Society and One's Place In It.
I agree that Archer is a twat. The irony in this book is so thick that you could use it to replace peanut butter in your sandwich. He talks and thinks about feminism ("women should be free!"), but he is giddy with the idea of leading May around Europe and telling her what to read and think. He's irritated by all the freedoms that Ellen seems to be enjoying with her iconoclastic behaviours. And he denigrates the behaviour of Larry Lefferts and his mistresses even though he had an affair with a married woman himself.
May is playing the role of a lifetime, one she was born to play. She is saying and doing all the things she was brought up to say and do as a young woman of her privileged class. She has the quiet knowledge that, in her society, women find ways to rule. They do get what they want. Archer may seem to have unconventional thoughts, but he doesn't really back them up. She knows that, in the end, the iron rails of their society are quite restrictive, and he is not the kind to even bend, let alone break, them.
One of the things I love about this book is the fact that Wharton is a feminist; she knows exactly what's going on here and how idiotic the men are and the rules of high society as well. Her description of the Van der Luydens dwelling in some "super-terrestrial twilight" of elite high society is hilarious. And Sillerton Jackson's visit to dinner at the Archers' is high comedy as well, with him sniffing the mushroom sauce before refusing it. Do not get me started on Larry Lefferts, whose big role is to set the fashion standard (while catting around and making his wife into a Stepford).
Didn't we all hate being around children even when we were children? I mean...
DeleteYeah, I don't get Archer. You call it irony and I guess that's it, but he just seems full of contradictions. Maybe we all are and I should just get over it, but I feel like Archer is confusing.
All these comments about May are making me think I need to pay more attention to her. I sort of bought into Archer's idea that she's not very interesting. Maybe she is!
I love Wharton's writing and having watched The Gilded Age have a good visual view of the book. My favourite character so far is Sillerton Jackson - full of snark that he keeps to himself sometimes (particularly enjoyed the dinner scene!), but at the same time is obvious to the entire town as he's known for his gossip.
ReplyDeleteSo far everyone is following the rules, or pretending to - Newland has some feminist thoughts, although I suspect he would only want a woman to be as free as him when it actually suited him, and Olenska plays up the need to be coached - does she really or is it an act?
Where's it going? I have ideas as I've never read the book before. I'm going to say that May isn't the simpleton everyone thinks she is and leave it at that.
I am so glad not to be living in that world. It's like the cancel culture of today. One wrong move, or perceived move and you're doomed!
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
DeleteOkay, I'm definitely paying more attention to May!
DeleteI'm also hoping that at some point in this novel Archer gets him comeuppance and Mrs. Mingott gets to par-tay.
1. Swoony love and heartbreak for sure. I hope Archer's heart gets broken because he's so annoying.
ReplyDelete2. He's a dick. The whole oh let's elope now before I fall in love with someone else and forsake you was super shitty, IMO
3. Ooooh, I'd read it from Mrs. M's POV. May just wants to marry well, and Archer I think wants the divorcee without any of the stigma. He's supposed to want May and seems to sort of want to want that, though, so maybe a few bonus points?
4. Loved your bio of Wharton b/c it seems like she was skewering a world that offended her-- nostalgic for the gilded age, yes, but also a bit of the sour grapes perspective.
I hope Archer gets his, for sure. On one hand, that's excellent writing by Wharton, right? I have strong feelings that he's a twat.
DeleteYeah, I think reading Wharton's story made me appreciate this book even more. It's clear she's writing from a place of knowledge and critique.
I’m hoping that Archer’s story arc is one of learning, and the reason he’s such a twat is because we need a baseline to work off of. That is really not the society in which he lives, however, so I am not hopeful. He is at least not as awful as he might be, which is a small thing, but a thing. What is with wanting to rush the wedding, but at the same time looking ahead at the life of a married person and not being happy about it? Conflicted much?
ReplyDeleteI loved your write up of Wharton’s life too, thank you for that. It sounds like she had a pretty good life, and I’m happy for her that she had that. I would love to be rich and living in Paris.
I’m a fan of the ‘Oxford comma’, and the fact that Wharton is not is distressing to me.
You're such a nice person, J. I'm over here like "Archer better get his" and you just want him to learn and be a better person. You're so kind.
DeleteHa! I would also love to be rich, living in France (maybe not a city), and have lots of dogs. And I get to write all day? I mean, what's not to love about that?
Codex: I'm not rereading so I don't remember the details, but you'll see why this is an important book.
ReplyDeleteThe problem for modern readers, especially women, is that no matter the society women couldn't do much. No right to vote or work in anything beyond seamstress or governess.
The class division was much worse and you were expected to marry within it to increase your families standing. Anything else and you were ostracized. I'll be back.
I mean, I think we're all aware that there are few options for Olenska and May. No one here is criticizing them and suggesting they do something different. We may be modern readers, but we're well aware of history.
DeleteCodex: You misunderstood. They were a product of their time. Everyone thought that way. Wharton was an outlier for writing what we take for granted.
DeleteCodex: aoi is a roman a clef. Olenska is Wharton watching the suffraggette movement unable to divorce (scandalous) moving to Paris because it was more liberal and intellectual while the.victorian era was so constrained that uk was impossible for wharton.
ReplyDeleteArcher is a self absorbed misogynist who just goes with societal expectation. Same as may who has insight but is not an Intellectual.
Olenska separated, wharton was forced to stay in abusive marriages. When she was the first woman to receive the pulitzer she was angry because the committee didn't understand what her Novel was actually about.
Left a response and question on your pluribus comment.
I don't know if he is a misogynist, though. The writing doesn't seem to indicate he thinks less of all women and his thinking is of a time. I mean, he's terrible, but all men were.
DeleteWharton was only married once. It doesn't sound like the marriage was great and her husband was at the very least verbally abusive - it sounds like the violent episodes were related to his mental illness - and she did get divorced, so I'm not sure she was "forced to stay in an abusive marriage." Maybe she was, but that's not how the biographies I scanned framed it. Maybe, who knows? She definitely did feel like she HAD to get married to avoid becoming an old maid. I sort of wonder if she would have enjoyed a life as an old maid.
Codex: spouse is the expert on women's rights and lit: she didn't want to marry him, wanted to divorce early. Family didn't let her. He was a wife beater (not necessarily mentally ill) Family may have destroyed his reputation when they discovered he embezzled their money and only then let wharton divorce. By which point she was considered too old to remarry, so she was finally free. It was easier in France at the time.
DeleteWharton wants us to sympathize with him. Intellectually he knows that women should be free it was a heated topic at the time. But he had no spine and conformed. So he was conflicted but "didnt grow as a person"Might be in later chapters. Misogynist. You'll see.
Not all of the men of that or any other time were like that. Just saw your comment below. Yes her wealth and connection allowed her to but she still had to endure for 30 years.
Wharton mother was a piece of work and I'm being kind.
I think it's a bridge too far to call Archer a misogynist. I also don't think that Wharton wants us to sympathize with him, either. She deals with him quite ironically, almost as a caricature in some scenes. I'm also pretty well read in Wharton and this book. Yes, Archer is somewhat an intellectual in that he reads and is a thinker, but he is still provincial in many of his thoughts and in his adherence to Old NY culture and society.
DeleteI'm hesitating to remark too much about the future happenings in the book because I don't want my comments to be a spoiler. I want the readers here to form opinions and enjoy events as they happen and appreciate Wharton's gift for irony, which is important here and considerable.
Codex: Hi Nance
DeleteI was talking about Wharton also having some problems with autocorrect. I read it when I was young not rereading it but I would at least call him a chauvinist.
Same trying not to spoil it.
Hi--Oh, he and all the other men are absolutely chauvinists, as were the greater number of high society gents at the time. The strict codes of behaviour definitely applied more to the women than the men. Ladies' actions, comings and goings, and general comportment were far more scrutinized than gentlemen's. The roots of The Patriarchy are deep, deep!
DeleteCodex: I mention that below, but the generational wealth pressure on the males wasn't a walk in the park either. Especially when they were young.
DeleteWhen did the patriarchy start? Does anyone know?
Codex: As to the romantized notion that wealth brought Wharton happiness. No. She was bitter and cynical because her wealth and standing didn't allow her to marry whom she wanted or escape her marriage. Back then divorces weren't easy and would have excluded her from society. Olenska has done nothing wrong but is treated like a harlot.
ReplyDeleteI mean, of course she was bitter. We're reading this book! It's really clear she fled to France, but her life in France also sounds really romantic (money! dogs! writing!).
DeleteI mean, Olenska did wear a lowcut dress...*gasp* *swoon*
Codex: I'll stop here. I told you it's an important book that stays with you. Wharton came from a society (think aristocrats) that was all about intrigue and manipulation. Wharton is manipulating the reader in very subtle way. I thought of olenska as lascivious (it's how I pictured her) when in fact she was everyone's intellectual superior (probably Whartons experience who had to publish under a cousins name because writing was not respectable)
DeleteWharton mother didn't want her to read books. IMAGINE!
Thank you for the bio of Edith Wharton. Very interesting and gives a lot of insight as I continue reading. It took me a bit to really get into this but I’m definitely there now! I agree with your assessment of Archer. I’m getting tense as I feel the story is headed towards his attraction to the countess. And after reading other comments I will be looking at May in a new light. I am reading this on my iPad through the Libby app. I have so many things to look up and it’s so easy to go back and forth from Google to the book and keep notes. I looked up almost every one of the things you did!
ReplyDelete*Dulcie
Right. Archer and the Countess are going to hit it. And what's May going to do?!?!
DeleteOoooh I love the biographical info you shared about Wharton! As always, I also love the list of things you look up. (How do you track these lists?)
ReplyDeleteI think I mentioned to you that I started listening to this book and was having trouble focusing on it. Well, I decided to give it another go and it stuck this time. I love it so far. It's HILARIOUS. Wharton is so sharp-eyed and sassy about society!
Archer is reminding me of Madame Bovary right now, and I'm not sure why; maybe the foreshadowing of some sort of adulterous relationship with Olenska? Honestly, I haven't read Madame Bovary in decades, so I could be manufacturing connections that aren't there, but there's something about how Archer is both opinionated and also kind of a dumbass that reminds me of Emma. I cannot 100% tell if Wharton likes this character and/or wants the reader to like him as he (hopefully) evolves over the course of the book, or if she hates his archetype and is mocking him mercilessly.
The only person I like so far is Ellen Olenska, and that's just because she seems to do what she wants. I'm not sure how I'll feel about that if she ends up hooking up with Archer, though.
I feel sorry for Archer's fiancee and hope that we get to know her better. I just finished a novel set in a similar time period to this one, where women existed pretty much at the whim of the men in their lives. It got me thinking about May and how careful she must have to be, because in a lot of ways her fate rests in Archer's hands. There's got to be a lot more to her than what Archer sees/believes there is, right? She's just behaving as she must think she has to, to secure her own future?
I just have a piece of paper in the book as I read it and mark down words/people I don't know, lines of note, and hats. Then I write it all up! It's not a complicated system, I assure you.
DeleteI think Wharton hates Archer. Otherwise, why would she write him as such a twat? Frankly, I don't think she likes ANYONE. Her descriptions of all the society people are mean.
So far this book is one of those books that makes me feel like I am not very smart - even though I know I am smart but I'm a "good with numbers" kind of smart, not a "good at parsing through more antiquated language" kind of smart. I kind of feel nothing for these people. I do wonder why he wants to expedite the marriage. Is he having financial problems? Does he want to get married ASAP to put an end to his apparent wandering eye/to remove the temptation to look for someone better?
ReplyDeleteOooohhhh...I just assumed he wanted to expedite the marriage because he wanted to control her, but maybe you're right. Do they need money? Standing? Smart question I don't know the answer to.
DeleteI assumed he wanted to expedite the marriage so they could have sex, but he doesn't seem particularly horny, so maybe that’s not it.
DeleteI had the inking that he is horny and that is the reason for the expedite of the marriage. I mean he sat alone and took her hand (imagine) during the engagement announcement and he was flustered when she went to church instead of walking around with May. So I think there is some sexual tension here. Maybe May know it and that is why she wants to have a longer engagement? Maybe it is some sort of test?
DeleteThanks so much for the detailed information about Wharton's life, it's helpful for understanding where the author is coming from.
ReplyDeleteI am loving this. Wharton's insight and obvious disdain for New York Society is hilarious. Archer is a twat. His conflicted attitude to women is interesting. I wonder whether his "women should be free" statement is more a safe way of displaying a risque attitude rather than something he truly believes. In general, most of his thoughts, May and Ellen are paternalistic. Or maybe he is so arrogant he thinks he knows best for everyone, both men and women? Sometimes he seems to see through the social norms, but at other times he can't shake himself free.
I think there's more to May than Archer sees. I hope we see more of that as the story progresses.
Right? That line about women should be as free as we are is so confusing!!! I think I just don't understand what Wharton is trying to tell us about Archer with that line. (Also, your vocabulary is spot on. Wharton's disdain, Archer as paternalistic - perfect language!)
DeleteCodex: Sorry doing this in between other things.
ReplyDelete@Engie you are picking up what's important. These people aren't exaggerated caricatures. They existed then they exist now. Wharton shines a light on how constrained a subgroup of the very wealthy are. Men as well. They were expected to be gentlemen. Well educated.
Keep the century in mind. No TV. If there was a transgression the gossip spread like wildfire. No more invites. Social pariah. In some ways these people are trapped in their wealth. Mistresses were frowned upon. There were rules. Obviously worse for women who had no options.
I am already behind...sigh. However, it sounds like from the comments that this may be one of those books where I have a hard time relating to the characters and so I subsequently have a hard time getting into the book as a whole. However, I am going to try! Thanks for the detailed info on Warton; my family is from Massachusetts and I am sure my Aunt, who is also a librarian, has much to say on the author! I will ask her and report back.
ReplyDeleteHas your aunt been to The Mount?! Is your aunt our secret Massachusetts correspondent?
DeleteI would not be surprised if she had been there. She went to Smith for college, so it is not that far from there.
DeleteI have to admit that this first section was a STRUGGLE for me. Like Lisa, I just don't feel like I am smart enough to "get it." Suzanne said it was hilarious and sharp... and I am not getting that at all. What am I missing? I will try another section, but right now, I'm not feeling any connection to the characters and the language is difficult.
ReplyDeleteI have complicated feelings about Archer. I don't know if he's a terrible guy or not. In some ways, yes, and in other ways, no? Like his comments about women needing to be as free as men are. He seems like he doesn't always take things at face value, but really thinks about them. But maybe I'm giving him too much credit.
I also giggled at the "erection" wording. Tehehe.
I don't think it's funny, either. I'm sort of horrified by how constrained everyone's choices are. I mean, I don't think shows like The Office are funny, either, so I think it might just be your viewpoint.
DeleteTHANK YOU for also laughing at the erection line. I KNOW it's ridiculous, but it took me so long to get used to the language.
I so appreciate the background info on the author. So interesting. Thank you for doing that research and sharing it here.
ReplyDeleteI will not apologize, but I will admit that I have not started it. I did read a few pages of the intro at the DMV on Saturday. A show of hands for who loves a visit to the DMV on a Saturday? Especially when you discover you needed your elderly mom to sign the damn car title. Anyway, I might check out an audio book, because I fear I won't find the time to read it right now. Looking forward to getting caught up . . . soon.
Nobody wants to go to the DMV ever, let alone on a Saturday. I'd be interested in how an audiobook goes. I think I would get lost if I were listening to it.
DeleteThis is a re-read for me, having read it maybe twenty years ago, and there are certain passages that just read differently for me this time, knowing how things are going to end.
ReplyDeleteOne thing I never really thought about before - and which was re-inforced for me by the background infor you give on Wharton - is how this novel is a period piece. I think I’ve always associated Edith Wharton with the Gilded Age becasue of this book and The House of Mirth, that I never really realized that this book actually looks *back* on that time period; it isn’t *of* that time period. So the dry ironic humour and narrative voice reads a little more snarky and self-righteous to me than it did before. I think it’s one thing to be commenting on contemporary society and quite another thing to be commenting on a time past through the prism of history, time, and experience.
I do think something that makes this book hard to read or connect to is that everything is so descriptive and laden with meaning that the reader doesn’t know what is important to hold on to. Dinners and balls and going to the opera and not having a job - it’s very different from my life now, and I love looking up all the period detail… but there’s an air of nostalgia about it all, both in the writing style and the substance of the novel. As if Wharton is desparately holding on to everything because it was so specific to a time in her life. And she wants to tell us about the Gilded Age, because there was such beauty and lavish indulgence in it. But at the same time, she herself thinks the humanity of the time, or of New York high society was incredibly shallow? Like if you think of Austen’s writing - I don’t think the rooms and physical world of Austen is as vivid as the people, but Wharton, I get the opposite feeling - the rooms are beautiful , the people are pallid and superficial.
-I don’t think Newland Archer is a twat, per se. I think he’s just really naive. How old do we think he is? I always thought he was mid thirties because of Daniel Day-Lewis playing him in the movie, but I’m realizing that he’s probably really early or mid twenties, and has lead a very sheltered life. He’s been petted and praised all his life by his mother and sister, and he lacks any sense of self-awareness or really world awareness. All he knows is this New York Society life and what is or isn’t “done”, which, let’s be honest, his mother and probably his father have fed him all his life. So he thinks he’s having all these grand thoughts and deep thoughts and grown up thoughts, and none of it is original. But then Ellen comes along, and he starts thinking about things in a new way because she intrigues him, but he’s not going to admit that his shift in thinking is because of her, because he feels a great attraction and sympathy where she is concerned and that’s not okay. He’s going to pretend that he was a forward thinker to begin with.
Yeah, it's interesting to think that she's writing about a time like we would be writing about the late 1970s/early 1980s. Sure, I was there and I can remember it, but it's not like it was a current piece! That interesting to think about.
DeleteI don't think of it as nostalgic at all. I wonder what makes you think she is looking back at all fondly. Her descriptions of the people and places is so mean.
Oh, I thought Newland was in his mid-20s and May is in her late teens. But I don't know why I think that. He keeps calling her a "girl," but who knows what that even means?
Codex:@Diane "Wharton, I get the opposite feeling - the rooms are beautiful , the people are pallid and superficial."
DeleteAstute observation. Never thought of that. She created the beauty she didn't find in people?
I'm enjoying the book so far but it's all the different characters I struggle with. I should have learned my lesson with The Joy Luck Club and started taking notes from the beginning. All the last names get jumbled in my head and every time I see Mingott I think of Gringott's. So there's that.
ReplyDeleteI don't think Newland has the backbone to push back against society, so I think he and May will get married and be miserable, but also probably the Countess will die tragically and he'll be distraught because she was his one true love?
Also, I had no idea it had been made into a movie!!
GRINGOTT'S! Yes! Now let's all imagine a dragon breaking out of Mrs. Mingott's basement. NOW I'M ALL IN.
DeleteOh! I love this Countess dying theory. Does she die by suicide? Or an accident? I'm into it.
I have not started reading the book. I now kind of just want to read a biography of and diaries by Edith Wharton. I saw the movie, and I thought Daniel Day-Lewis, Winony Ryder as May and Michelle Pfeiffer as Countess Olenska were perfectly cast.
ReplyDeleteI agree Archer is a bit of a twat, but I actually thought this quote -What could he and she really know of each other, since it was his duty, as a "decent" fellow, to conceal his past from her, and hers, as a marriageable girl, to have no past to conceal? (page 41) - was less twattish and just very insightful.
Oh yes at snickering at 'erection' - Eve and I have had many merry exchanges about how often the word 'ejaculation' is used in this era of literature.
I have been watching The Gilded Age and all of the machinations and tiny details that go into the social order and behaviour are fascinating.
I feel left because everyone is talking about The Gilded Age and I don't even know what that is - I'm presuming it's a tv show?
DeleteYeah, I don't know if Archer is a twat. I'm leaning towards yes, but maybe he really is just a product of his time.
Well, I have to admit that I'm having trouble with this book! I started with the Kindle version and couldn't concentrate at all. So I gave up and got the audiobook read by David Horovitch, and his voice is so nice and soothing that I keep falling asleep. If nothing else, I may have discovered a cure for my insomnia! As per usual, I very much enjoyed your recap and history of the author, as well as the pictures and things you looked up. I see in other comments that there's a movie based on this book - and I can't imagine it at this point!
ReplyDeleteHa ha. I sort of love it when I have a book that puts me to sleep. Sleep is better than reading at a certain point!
DeletePhew I am really glad to hear that avis reader like Lisa and Stephany struggle with the writing style … I had a tough time getting through these first few chapters and i first thought it might be because I am not a native speaker (but then I remember that I read a lot of English literature in college - when my English definitely wasn’t as fluent as it is now - and I think I just haven’t read literature like that in a long time. I hope to get into it as we continue… some things definitely didn’t hit for me as much as for other people.
ReplyDeleteI also had trouble keeping all the names/people straight and yes, Archer is a bit of a twat (although I am torn about him almost being kind of a feminist on hand and a total "typical man" on the other).
I have a serious advantage in keeping track of people because I take such extensive notes. If I were just casually reading this, I can't imagine how I'd keep things straight! I don't think it has anything to do with your language skills, San - it's kind of old-fashioned, stilted language with loooong sentences. It can be challenging to get through some of it.
DeleteGah--I missed the first installment of this! The book is in the public domain, so the text is available on Project Gutenberg as well. https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/541
ReplyDeleteYes! Free versions everywhere!
Delete1) I haven't read this before. If you haven't read it before, what do you think is going to happen in the rest of this book?
ReplyDeleteI have also not read this book. Right now one would think that Archer will not manage to stay engaged to May – it is so long, right? And that he goes and has fun (What ever that may entail) with Ellen. And the gossip will start and we get a full blown scandel. And either Archer and Ellen head of for a life of travel and leaving disruption in any society they brush or it all comes down to Archer showing repentance and crawling back to May and NY society. I am assuming the first since this book won NoBel Prize so it must have shaken up things.
2) Newland Archer is a weid character. H e is all stuck in his upbringing and social ways yet he hs glimpses of seeing a new way. Woman re supposed to be fee. He is intrigued by the carelessness of Ellen and the Duke. He sends flowers to „friends“. He doesn’t care about social norms when this part of family is annoyed by that part… And at the dame time he is embarrassed by Ellens ways. Heck even calling her Ellen. oopsi. I guess he is the character that will portrait the inner conflict of this whole story.
3) For me it seems like QArcher loves May for she is what society expects of a woman. White washed like the Lillies of the valley she collects. Pretty but pale. Not exciting. And Archer is stumped about is routine life. And he wants a routine marriage. And he wants it quickly. And then he goes off looking for excitement elsewhere. It makes him look shady and I am not sure I want to read about it.
As for May I fear she doesn’t know how to think of herself. As Archer do perfectly observes generations of woman have been raised to just be pale and fit in and not be exciting and unique.
It would be interesting to see Mays point of view however at this point I think she wouldn’t be able to carry the story.
4) I guess if they lived in a different society they would pull hair, ride horses, deliver milk and such things. Then it just happened they will be engaged probably because May is already pregnant? I don’t know.
I guess the NY society here set the scene for what Whaton will want to ripp apart at a later point. I am not familiar enough but I wonder if she paints the society a bit more aggressively as it would have been in order to show more contrast in actions. At the same time I find all the subtle hints hard to grasp since I am not familiar. We’ll see how that develops.