Edith exhibits her adroit emotional intelligence in response to Amy's comment that when Edith mentions her novelist friend Reardon, undoubtedly no one recognizes the name:
'Well, my dear, you don't expect ordinary novel-readers to know about Mr Reardon. I wish my acquaintances were a better kind of people; then, of course, I should hear of his books more often. But one has to make the best of such society as offers. If you and your husband forsake me, I shall feel it a sad loss; I shall indeed.'
It's hard to read sarcasm, especially from a stranger online, but what I took at first to be sincere, seems on second read, to imply that Edith's EQ is lacking. The quote pulled out, can be read ambivalently. I often wonder who these mythical non-readers are, and then I realize, they are all around.
I think Edith is doing the best she can to be kind. About the only straw of hope Any has to grasp now is the illusion that her husband's writing is just too good to be appreciated by most people.
Actually I think Shakespeare in his comedies was the first to do this well:
'I want, among other things, to insist upon the fateful power of trivial incidents. No one has yet dared to do this seriously....The mere fact of grave issues in life depending on such paltry things is monstrously ludicrous. Life is a huge farce, and the advantage of possessing a sense of humour is that it enables one to defy fate with mocking laughter.'
Since, it was a preoccupation of Javier Marias in his fiction.
I now consider Amy irredeemably self-centered, and would have cited the same excerpt as did Yiyun as evidence. Also, "... there would be talk of 'poor Mrs. Reardan.' It was intolerable."
Edwin's Sacrifice of his books - "many of those vanished volumes were dear old friends to him..." pales next to the suffering of Harold Biffen. I enjoyed the description of Biffen so much. "But the man was superior to these accidents of flesh and raiment."
And I thrilled throughout the discussion of the prosody of "Oedipus Rex!" "For half an hour the two men talked Greek metres is if they lived in the world where the only hunger known could be satisfied by grand or sweet cadences."
Reardon seem so happy when studying and discussing the classics. He is not ever going to be happy writing for money. Even if a teacher didn't pay much, I think he'd be happier spending his days discussing literature.
Amy has a baby and no prospect for affording even food the next week while her husband founders at a rarified and prestigious occupation for which he is not cut out (and few are). I don't blame Amy for her regrets.
Yet I t’s Amy’s regrets regarding status that seem to plague her most of all - "... no degree of distinction in her husband would be as much value to her, unless she had the pleasure of witnessing it affect upon others..." Also her rejection of Edith Carter, who "... made her envious, cold to her husband, resentful against fate."
the novel is particularly good showing the character's actions within their social/economic circumstances. While some maybe more likable/praiseworthy than others, their conduct is always judged within context. The effects of poverty are pervasive. And it feels like judging Amy (and Jasper) feels we're doing so morals that can only be purchased through privilege.
I feel torn about Amy. She creates a roller-coaster of emotional confusion for me; one moment I despise her seeming cold, self-centeredness, the next, I feel a whisper of empathy for her as she grapples with the limiting reality of being a woman during this time.
Biffen’s “singular dignity” stands in stark contrast to the “requirement of [Amy’s] nature” that “distinction in her husband” (a proxy for herself?) held value only if “she had the pleasure of witnessing its effect upon others." And yet, although Amy could not abide becoming “an object of pity” - any “talk of ‘poor Mrs. Reardon’ … was intolerable” – she seems wont to find reason (and dignity) in Reardon’s newfound empathy for Biffen (and/or for himself?): “I don’t think of him with so much pity as I used that a result of suffering oneself.” When Amy “set her lips and sighed,” I felt a moment of fragile/vulnerable love that transcends, perhaps, the “requirement of her nature.” Perhaps, she is simply a realistic depiction of a flawed human, grappling with the exigencies of quotidian existence?
Her complicated character seems to reflect the psychological realism that is discussed in the chapter....she is neither “good” nor “bad.” Trying to survive with the choices she’s made. She says in this chapter that she realizes she made “an error” in thinking that her husband would become a man of literary distinction. She perhaps has not fully or fairly dealt with that error, but she does acknowledge it.
At first I thought for sure that Reardon was modeled after Gissing but Biffen now seems more like him to me (at least regarding writing). The conversation of realism vs. artistic fiction made me wonder if New Grub Street is Biffen's book or modeled after what Gissing thought about when writing this book. Biffen said "Let us copy life! When the man and woman are to meet for a great scene of passion, let it all be frustrated by one or the other of them having a bad cold in the head, and so on. Let the pretty girl get a disfiguring pimple on the nose..." I think Gissing's New Grub Street is giving us a view of a writers life, "warts and all" without the melodrama and probably not the happily ever after and is almost metafiction. I wonder if (like Biffen) Gissing's writing style was viewed as a break from the traditional style of the times and if that is so, how was it received by the public.
This is interesting. Gissing's writing does seem something like what Biffen describes, though much is still done for effect and humor is not absent. Having never read him, I am intrigued to see what Gissing does with regard to plot and conclusion because he does not seem the sort of manufacture twists or great changes of fortune.
At the end of this chapter, Gissing is a bit on the nose. Biffen literally sold his clothes off his back...leading not to sympathy/empathy, but the Reardons's self-awareness, or perhaps self-centeredness, or perhaps, selfishness. I'm thinking, this close to Thanksgiving, of those who allow us to build ourselves up with their comparable disadvantages. Do Edith and Amy do this for each other?
I loved the gathering of friends at Reardon’s. Contrast Alfred’s party with his friends in Ch. 8 after which he has to recover for several days. This group was inspired by the love of art/literature.
I have La Boheme ringing in my ears. Apparently the opera was written slightly after OGS, but it was based on a book of vignettes on struggling artists. The bohemian life must have been a theme at the time.
Since I’m not a writer like most of you, it may be easier for me to enjoy descriptions of starving writers.
I also loved the gathering of friends. For me, Harold Biffen is a breath of fresh air. While I certainly do not want to sentimentalize the harshness – and inequity of poverty (so often a consequence of conscious institutional policies and societal “blindness”) - Gissing’s description and development of Harold’s character captivated me: “His excessive meagreness would all but have qualified him to enter an exhibition in the capacity of living skeleton … But the man was superior to these accidents of flesh and raiment … In his gait there was a singular dignity; only a man of cultivated mind and graceful character could move and stand as he did” (125).
“Many of those vanished volumes were dear old friends to him; he could have told you where he had picked them up and when; to open them recalled a past moment of intellectual growth, a mood of hope or despondency, a stage of struggle.” Oh how much I can relate to your relationship with books, Reardon!
Later, Biffen says to Reardon, “You are repelled by what has injured you; I am attracted by it.” An insight from a friend. The avoidance of reality creates a certain type of struggle.
I loved the line about a person being repelled vs. attracted to what has injured them. Definitely two strands of psychological realism. And to put it in terms of wanting to write is so interesting.
One of the many transactional analysis of how people come to love each other (or not). “her pride in him was to be one phase of her love. Now she was well aware that no degree of distinction in her husband would be of much value to her unless she had the pleasure of witnessing its effect upon others; she must shine with reflected light before an admiring assembly.”
My heart was captivated by the camaraderie between Reardon and Biffen; a moment of sweet authenticity, a salve from quotidian realities: “… the two men talked Greek metres as if they lived in a world where the only hunger known could be satisfied by grand or sweet cadences.”
"And I'm sure I don't know how you can resist the temptation. I feel sure you could write books almost as clever as your husband's," says Edith to Amy. Is it just my imagination or is Gissing setting up the women in this novel (Amy, Marian, the Milivan sisters) to be as successful (more so?) than the men in their lives, even if they do so quietly, without credit?
I wonder which authors took up Gissing / Biffen's stylistic suggestions re: true verisimilitude? Contemporary authors of auto-fiction? Someone in the post-modern era? No one was coming to my mind, but I'm sure they are out there!
"the Barclay Trust, a charity whose moderate funds were largely devoted to the support of gentlemen engaged in administering it." I had to read that twice; it's so casually stated.
Edith is a gem of a friend, sincere in her affection for Amy and Edwin, generous without expectation of reciprocation, and willing to work at maintaining the connection even when Amy discourages her. "If you and your husband forsake me, I shall feel it a sad loss; I shall indeed." I understand Amy's feelings, but it's painful to see her turn away from someone who offers warmth and connection.
Biffen's desire to create the "unutterably tedious" strikes me as farcical. Plenty of humor (and pathos) in Gissing, by contrast. And I was surprised to see Reardon laughing; the man does have a sense of humor, even if Biffen chides him for it.
Two comments. First: I think Amy is fine! She’s stuck in every way yet manages to still be decent to her husband and his writer friends. Second: Seinfeld! Biffen but funny.
Okay, “Amy," I get why you are sticking up for her :), and I am trying to cut her some slack, but even if her intentions are good, she fails to see where she is part of the problem. It never feels like she’s side-by-side with Edwin in what should be their combined struggle, in which she helps create an atmosphere for Edwin that supports his process.
That would be ideal perhaps but she’s a human being, not a saint. I want to slap him just reading about him! That being said, I read ahead into chapter 12 and their matrimonial woes become really bad.
So many interesting observations on this chapter. Fun to read here! I was struck by the line:
"Life is a huge farce, and the advantage of possessing a sense of humour is that it enables one to defy fate with mocking laughter.”
A bit of the Existentialist or Absurdist, this Reardon. I was relieved by the interaction between Biffen and Reardon. Finally someone enables Reardon to have a bit of self-reflection (at the end of the chapter).
I also liked the discussion of a writing philosophy "psychological realism," the importance of humor, and the discussion about fiction as the ugly stepchild of drama, brought together some of the many references to drama and dramatists throughout the book. I refer to this part of the exchange:
[Biffen] "Fiction hasn’t yet outgrown the influence of the stage on which it originated. Whatever a man writes for effect is wrong and bad.”
[Reardon]“Only in your view. There may surely exist such a thing as the art of fiction.”
So much about what works and doesn't work from everyday life when transfered to the page. And of course, Reardon is driven to understand the “art of fiction." I've been noticing how much of this book is dialogue between characters. This secton put that into a bit of context for me. Though I have no idea where it will go, I'm enjoying the surprise dive into theory.
I’ve thought this setup for all four women. Already, they might write for the father, as Marian is doing through researching, and for husband, as Amy is “proofreading” for Reardon. What will the Milvain sisters do for Jasper? Right now in the book, it seems they will succeed in producing writing, as opposed to Jasper’s imagining that he will write. Will they end up writing for him or spurring him on to write?
And what else will Gissing say about women in the writing “industry”? He clearly admires the women writers we know and love.
Edith exhibits her adroit emotional intelligence in response to Amy's comment that when Edith mentions her novelist friend Reardon, undoubtedly no one recognizes the name:
'Well, my dear, you don't expect ordinary novel-readers to know about Mr Reardon. I wish my acquaintances were a better kind of people; then, of course, I should hear of his books more often. But one has to make the best of such society as offers. If you and your husband forsake me, I shall feel it a sad loss; I shall indeed.'
It's hard to read sarcasm, especially from a stranger online, but what I took at first to be sincere, seems on second read, to imply that Edith's EQ is lacking. The quote pulled out, can be read ambivalently. I often wonder who these mythical non-readers are, and then I realize, they are all around.
I think Edith is doing the best she can to be kind. About the only straw of hope Any has to grasp now is the illusion that her husband's writing is just too good to be appreciated by most people.
Actually I think Shakespeare in his comedies was the first to do this well:
'I want, among other things, to insist upon the fateful power of trivial incidents. No one has yet dared to do this seriously....The mere fact of grave issues in life depending on such paltry things is monstrously ludicrous. Life is a huge farce, and the advantage of possessing a sense of humour is that it enables one to defy fate with mocking laughter.'
Since, it was a preoccupation of Javier Marias in his fiction.
I now consider Amy irredeemably self-centered, and would have cited the same excerpt as did Yiyun as evidence. Also, "... there would be talk of 'poor Mrs. Reardan.' It was intolerable."
Edwin's Sacrifice of his books - "many of those vanished volumes were dear old friends to him..." pales next to the suffering of Harold Biffen. I enjoyed the description of Biffen so much. "But the man was superior to these accidents of flesh and raiment."
And I thrilled throughout the discussion of the prosody of "Oedipus Rex!" "For half an hour the two men talked Greek metres is if they lived in the world where the only hunger known could be satisfied by grand or sweet cadences."
Reardon seem so happy when studying and discussing the classics. He is not ever going to be happy writing for money. Even if a teacher didn't pay much, I think he'd be happier spending his days discussing literature.
Amy has a baby and no prospect for affording even food the next week while her husband founders at a rarified and prestigious occupation for which he is not cut out (and few are). I don't blame Amy for her regrets.
Yet I t’s Amy’s regrets regarding status that seem to plague her most of all - "... no degree of distinction in her husband would be as much value to her, unless she had the pleasure of witnessing it affect upon others..." Also her rejection of Edith Carter, who "... made her envious, cold to her husband, resentful against fate."
the novel is particularly good showing the character's actions within their social/economic circumstances. While some maybe more likable/praiseworthy than others, their conduct is always judged within context. The effects of poverty are pervasive. And it feels like judging Amy (and Jasper) feels we're doing so morals that can only be purchased through privilege.
I feel torn about Amy. She creates a roller-coaster of emotional confusion for me; one moment I despise her seeming cold, self-centeredness, the next, I feel a whisper of empathy for her as she grapples with the limiting reality of being a woman during this time.
Biffen’s “singular dignity” stands in stark contrast to the “requirement of [Amy’s] nature” that “distinction in her husband” (a proxy for herself?) held value only if “she had the pleasure of witnessing its effect upon others." And yet, although Amy could not abide becoming “an object of pity” - any “talk of ‘poor Mrs. Reardon’ … was intolerable” – she seems wont to find reason (and dignity) in Reardon’s newfound empathy for Biffen (and/or for himself?): “I don’t think of him with so much pity as I used that a result of suffering oneself.” When Amy “set her lips and sighed,” I felt a moment of fragile/vulnerable love that transcends, perhaps, the “requirement of her nature.” Perhaps, she is simply a realistic depiction of a flawed human, grappling with the exigencies of quotidian existence?
Her complicated character seems to reflect the psychological realism that is discussed in the chapter....she is neither “good” nor “bad.” Trying to survive with the choices she’s made. She says in this chapter that she realizes she made “an error” in thinking that her husband would become a man of literary distinction. She perhaps has not fully or fairly dealt with that error, but she does acknowledge it.
At first I thought for sure that Reardon was modeled after Gissing but Biffen now seems more like him to me (at least regarding writing). The conversation of realism vs. artistic fiction made me wonder if New Grub Street is Biffen's book or modeled after what Gissing thought about when writing this book. Biffen said "Let us copy life! When the man and woman are to meet for a great scene of passion, let it all be frustrated by one or the other of them having a bad cold in the head, and so on. Let the pretty girl get a disfiguring pimple on the nose..." I think Gissing's New Grub Street is giving us a view of a writers life, "warts and all" without the melodrama and probably not the happily ever after and is almost metafiction. I wonder if (like Biffen) Gissing's writing style was viewed as a break from the traditional style of the times and if that is so, how was it received by the public.
This is interesting. Gissing's writing does seem something like what Biffen describes, though much is still done for effect and humor is not absent. Having never read him, I am intrigued to see what Gissing does with regard to plot and conclusion because he does not seem the sort of manufacture twists or great changes of fortune.
At the end of this chapter, Gissing is a bit on the nose. Biffen literally sold his clothes off his back...leading not to sympathy/empathy, but the Reardons's self-awareness, or perhaps self-centeredness, or perhaps, selfishness. I'm thinking, this close to Thanksgiving, of those who allow us to build ourselves up with their comparable disadvantages. Do Edith and Amy do this for each other?
I loved the gathering of friends at Reardon’s. Contrast Alfred’s party with his friends in Ch. 8 after which he has to recover for several days. This group was inspired by the love of art/literature.
I have La Boheme ringing in my ears. Apparently the opera was written slightly after OGS, but it was based on a book of vignettes on struggling artists. The bohemian life must have been a theme at the time.
Since I’m not a writer like most of you, it may be easier for me to enjoy descriptions of starving writers.
I also loved the gathering of friends. For me, Harold Biffen is a breath of fresh air. While I certainly do not want to sentimentalize the harshness – and inequity of poverty (so often a consequence of conscious institutional policies and societal “blindness”) - Gissing’s description and development of Harold’s character captivated me: “His excessive meagreness would all but have qualified him to enter an exhibition in the capacity of living skeleton … But the man was superior to these accidents of flesh and raiment … In his gait there was a singular dignity; only a man of cultivated mind and graceful character could move and stand as he did” (125).
I too was struck by the fact that Alfred's gatherings make him miserable for days afterwards. Too much indulgence in bitterness (however convivial)?
“Many of those vanished volumes were dear old friends to him; he could have told you where he had picked them up and when; to open them recalled a past moment of intellectual growth, a mood of hope or despondency, a stage of struggle.” Oh how much I can relate to your relationship with books, Reardon!
Later, Biffen says to Reardon, “You are repelled by what has injured you; I am attracted by it.” An insight from a friend. The avoidance of reality creates a certain type of struggle.
I loved the line about a person being repelled vs. attracted to what has injured them. Definitely two strands of psychological realism. And to put it in terms of wanting to write is so interesting.
One of the many transactional analysis of how people come to love each other (or not). “her pride in him was to be one phase of her love. Now she was well aware that no degree of distinction in her husband would be of much value to her unless she had the pleasure of witnessing its effect upon others; she must shine with reflected light before an admiring assembly.”
My heart was captivated by the camaraderie between Reardon and Biffen; a moment of sweet authenticity, a salve from quotidian realities: “… the two men talked Greek metres as if they lived in a world where the only hunger known could be satisfied by grand or sweet cadences.”
It was a relief to see Reardon enjoying himself with someone who “gets” him.
"And I'm sure I don't know how you can resist the temptation. I feel sure you could write books almost as clever as your husband's," says Edith to Amy. Is it just my imagination or is Gissing setting up the women in this novel (Amy, Marian, the Milivan sisters) to be as successful (more so?) than the men in their lives, even if they do so quietly, without credit?
Interesting thought. Maybe you are right.
I wondered this too!
I wonder which authors took up Gissing / Biffen's stylistic suggestions re: true verisimilitude? Contemporary authors of auto-fiction? Someone in the post-modern era? No one was coming to my mind, but I'm sure they are out there!
"the Barclay Trust, a charity whose moderate funds were largely devoted to the support of gentlemen engaged in administering it." I had to read that twice; it's so casually stated.
Edith is a gem of a friend, sincere in her affection for Amy and Edwin, generous without expectation of reciprocation, and willing to work at maintaining the connection even when Amy discourages her. "If you and your husband forsake me, I shall feel it a sad loss; I shall indeed." I understand Amy's feelings, but it's painful to see her turn away from someone who offers warmth and connection.
Biffen's desire to create the "unutterably tedious" strikes me as farcical. Plenty of humor (and pathos) in Gissing, by contrast. And I was surprised to see Reardon laughing; the man does have a sense of humor, even if Biffen chides him for it.
The “Barclay Trust,” sadly the tradition of such charities continues, I think.
Investment bankers, lawyers, and doctors -- top tier professionals that do work that begets more work.
Two comments. First: I think Amy is fine! She’s stuck in every way yet manages to still be decent to her husband and his writer friends. Second: Seinfeld! Biffen but funny.
Seinfeld. Perfect!
Okay, “Amy," I get why you are sticking up for her :), and I am trying to cut her some slack, but even if her intentions are good, she fails to see where she is part of the problem. It never feels like she’s side-by-side with Edwin in what should be their combined struggle, in which she helps create an atmosphere for Edwin that supports his process.
That would be ideal perhaps but she’s a human being, not a saint. I want to slap him just reading about him! That being said, I read ahead into chapter 12 and their matrimonial woes become really bad.
So many interesting observations on this chapter. Fun to read here! I was struck by the line:
"Life is a huge farce, and the advantage of possessing a sense of humour is that it enables one to defy fate with mocking laughter.”
A bit of the Existentialist or Absurdist, this Reardon. I was relieved by the interaction between Biffen and Reardon. Finally someone enables Reardon to have a bit of self-reflection (at the end of the chapter).
I also liked the discussion of a writing philosophy "psychological realism," the importance of humor, and the discussion about fiction as the ugly stepchild of drama, brought together some of the many references to drama and dramatists throughout the book. I refer to this part of the exchange:
[Biffen] "Fiction hasn’t yet outgrown the influence of the stage on which it originated. Whatever a man writes for effect is wrong and bad.”
[Reardon]“Only in your view. There may surely exist such a thing as the art of fiction.”
So much about what works and doesn't work from everyday life when transfered to the page. And of course, Reardon is driven to understand the “art of fiction." I've been noticing how much of this book is dialogue between characters. This secton put that into a bit of context for me. Though I have no idea where it will go, I'm enjoying the surprise dive into theory.
I’ve thought this setup for all four women. Already, they might write for the father, as Marian is doing through researching, and for husband, as Amy is “proofreading” for Reardon. What will the Milvain sisters do for Jasper? Right now in the book, it seems they will succeed in producing writing, as opposed to Jasper’s imagining that he will write. Will they end up writing for him or spurring him on to write?
And what else will Gissing say about women in the writing “industry”? He clearly admires the women writers we know and love.
This was written in response to Heather Wolf’s comment above.