Every time I reach “It was fringed with joy” Woolf pauses me. Yes, I say. More is coming, life, and grownups and their pinched perception. Still, for a moment, “It was.” I recall that Shirley Hazzard said she believed that imagination, wonder, needs be identified early, and nurtured. And C. S. Lewis hoped we would be surprised by joy. James knows this all. It is how he’s made and outfitted within. . . . Here, to dip in to, along the way: https://eyeondesign.aiga.org/the-sisterly-collusion-behind-vanessa-bells-book-covers-for-virginia-woolf/
I am one of eight children and so it is not so hard for me to take them all in. What is interesting is that Mrs. Ramsey was 44 years old when she had James.
First impressions: enthusiastic, supportive mother, welcoming to (almost) all guests, while caring for eight children; difficult, domineering father; the “odious” atheist Tansley, a subject of mockery (and on whom a lot of ink is spilled); daughters wishing for themselves “a wilder life; not always taking care of some man or other”; young James, joyful but apparently resentful of his oppressive father; sycophants parodying Mr. Ramsay (“he said it would rain; they said it would be a positive tornado“); and Lily Briscoe, all but dismissed by Mrs. Ramsay (“she would never marry; one cannot take her painting very seriously; she was an independent little creature”).
First time reading Woolf's fiction, and I'm not sure I'm approaching it in the right way. I keep wanting a character list (so many children!) and the only plot I can discern is "James wants to go to the lighthouse." I keep wanting more action or plot, but I'm hopeful that this reading group will teach me how to read Woolf more effectively. So far, I can only say that Woolf seems to be all about the "vibes" of what's going on rather than "what's going on."
Hi! I love that you're jumping in. It may not feel driven by plot, but there are micro (and macro) stories that Woolf tells as she explores the interiority of the characters and their relationship to each other and their surroundings. There are all the aspects of a more momentum-driven plot: tension, suffering, consequences, exhilaration - just executed with a finer brush. There's also a lot of pleasure in the sound and movement of the sentences. I still have yet to come across a writer who can move so seamlessly between points-of-view...on a form level, it's still groundbreaking (and magical). Hope you enjoy : )
I am definitely learning all about everything you've mentioned (the micro-story of the servant whose father is dying of cancer in the mountains of Switzerland!) and loving it all.
I'm a high school English teacher, so I'm always looking for or wondering "How could I convince students to read and possibly love this book?"
I'm still meditating on what "hook" I would use for TTL (if I ever chose to teach it). Right now, I'm fairly convinced this book--more than many others--is for adults only, not teenagers. [I do know of high school classes that read it though].
I'm thinking (right now) that the book's hook is form and aesthetic primarily, which are not really selling points for most teens. They want to feel, and they love plot. This book definitely will make you feel, but it takes a lot of work to get there, a lot of stillness and attention to every single word. But yes, I am enjoying TTL so much. Thank you!
I would just say that I fell in love with TTL when I was around 18 or 19, and it was one of the first books I ever felt spoke to me on the level of spirit. I actually felt more connected to it than more traditional plot-driven books. I might just encourage you to consider the kids like me as well - the poetic kids, the music kids, the kids interested in sounds and minds and ideas. If it helps, a lot of kids are interested in “streams of consciousness” - I remember HS and college friends starting to discover that modernist approach and finding it to be really powerful for them. Very fucking *cool,* even (I remember kids would try out their own “automatic” writing with whatever bubbled up or play with those longer sentences). That freedom - and the angle of this kind of work as groundbreaking and radical - was a pretty big hook. The other was the intensity of the psychological interiors, the way she surfaces what is usually private perception, and the ideas or questions she raises - esp as a kid with intense feelings and thoughts trying to understand my own mind at that age and the viewpoints of others around me.
Anyway, just some food for thought! I think you’re so lucky to have that job.
I am always in awe of how deftly Woolf moves between points-of-view. But she is aware of potential confusion on the part of the reader and so the occasional little markers--“(James thought)”--seem to be her way of providing clarity.
On this reading, I’m noticing how the shifts in POV add movement and life to the narrative. We learn, at the end of chapter 3, that Mrs. Ramsey is sitting for a portrait. We had not known this before and we’ve experienced so much while she’s been reasonably still.
I just read Ali Smith, The Accidental, which shifts POV seemingly without warning. But her voices are more contrasting than VW's and somehow easier to track. There is something about the pure strength of VW's narrative voice that casts a very strong shade over all of her characters - and i find I have to read carefully to track the shifts. As you wrote above - there are clear signposts. I read TTLH exactly one year ago with Elizabeth Gaffney's the24hourroom.org and marked many of the POV shifts then with blue highlight in my kindle. As I read the novel for the second time, it is interesting seeing this shifts as they approach.
I can only shake my head when, at the end of I we have Charles full of pride with the most beautiful woman, and at the beginning of II , repeats the worn line to James about not going to the lighthouse. Anyone would get that would piss off Mrs. Ramsay. Is he that clueless?!
I have been accused of something like this!: "also with some secret conceit at his own accuracy of judgement. What he said was true. It was always true. He was incapable of untruth; never tampered with a fact; never altered a disagreeable word to suit the pleasure or convenience of any mortal being, least of all of his own children.."
Here, a lovely, complicated passage, something to pause on for a long time: "her daughters, Prue, Nancy, Rose—could sport with infidel ideas which they had brewed for themselves of a life different from hers; in Paris, perhaps; a wilder life; not always taking care of some man or other; for there was in all their minds a mute questioning of deference and chivalry, of the Bank of England and the Indian Empire, of ringed fingers and lace, though to them all there was something in this of the essence of beauty, which called out the manliness in their girlish hearts, and made them, as they sat at table beneath their mother’s eyes, honour her strange severity, her extreme courtesy..."
An insightful mother's understanding of her intelligent daughters' pushing away of and yet still the pull of the past, of homeland and of myth and authority that mother represents.
Ha, timeless! Especially now with social media: "Strife, divisions, difference of opinion, prejudices twisted into the very fibre of being, oh, that they should begin so early, Mrs. Ramsay deplored. They were so critical, her children."
I loved this generational unease, too. It's not quite our generational unease. Nancy, Rose, and Prue – have perfidious ideas about their mother’s sense of gender relations, yet their mute questioning of the Bank of England and the Indian Empire isn’t a contemporary question of colonization or a global economy, nor is it a questioning, yet, of whether one of them might like to “negotiate treaties” or “control finance” herself. The yearning for a different life than their mother’s manages to eke out only as a desire for “a wilder life, in Paris, perhaps, not always taking care of some man or other.”
And at other moments they still see her (as so many daughters see their mothers, at some moment or other) as a Queen.
I love what you say here about Woolf paying respect to Mrs. Ramsay's art of the home, of people. With every read of this book I'm struck by the moment she and Tansley make it to the quay. It seems like Mrs. Ramsay has this really true, impulsive expression of desire and admiration for the "the green sand dunes with the wild flowing grasses on them, which always seemed to be running away into some moon country, uninhabited of men." That, then followed by this incredibly controlled sentence, where Mrs. Ramsay dutifully remembers that's the view her husband loves. Her uninhibited exclamation of beauty returns to the life of "men", which might mean her own role as a woman, sure, but also seems to be a return to the earthbound. She knows she can't stay in that place of wildness, of "moon country"! Might she become like a Lily if she does?
My first reading of Woolf: Not much action, but much is going on in Mrs. Ramsey’s thoughts--her compassion, frustrations, enthusiasm--as the waves on the beach warn her “that it was all ephemeral”.
This is my favorite book and Woolf my favorite author and even 45 years later after the first time reading I am still amazed at her writing. She elevates ordinary life to a life outside of the ordinary finding the essentialness in everything and knows that relationships are the necessary contrast to knowing ourselves. She is extraordinary.
Such a great summary of all three first sections of “To the Lighthouse." I am taken in by the movement between the shifting points of view that all show the vulnerabilities of the primary characters thus far: Mrs. Ramsey’s self-awareness of her own suffocating gentility (she seems to despise Tansley as much as she needs to “invite” him); the children’s certainty they will outdo their mother even as they idolize her; and Tansley’s class sensitivity.
I am also struck by the circus advertisement. I looked up the date of Nabokov’s “Spring in Fialta,” well known for its circus advertisement element. I can’t help but wonder if he read this.
Reading To the Lighthouse again, I'm struck by Woolf's keen use of verticality to peer beyond the simplicity of sitting for a picture (Lily's picture!) or a child's anticipation of a trip to a lighthouse, and how the layered situation inhabited by these characters, and their power dynamics, urges me to read on with great interest. Looking forward to more of everyone's insights here!
So lovely to be reading with people again! After reading some contemporary novels recently, I really had to adjust to the long (long) sentences that one has to retrace and reread. I am keeping Welty’s interesting comment, that there is not a “shadow of detachment” in the novel before me as I go. So much interior stuff going on in these short opening chapters!
This is my first time reading Virginia Woolf and the long sentences were at times confusing. Prior to this book I had read that Woolf writes in a stream of consciousness. Any tips on how to understand her writing better? I loved reading all the comments posted today and it has helped with the understanding of what has transpired in the first few chapters. The odious little atheist and James's severe anger at his father is something to keep an eye on.
James’ strong reaction to his father felt very true to a passionate young child absorbed with his mother and the writing - if there had been an axe...- was the first moment I felt enlivened/in awe of her humor.
I am thrilled to be back in the world Virginia Woolf has created for us. Others have mentioned, she is a favorite author; so she is to me -- or she used to be, back when I read her books.
And yet I have not reread any of her books in years, so I'm nervous. I'm longing to love them, and her!, just as much now, or more, than I did before.
Rereading To The Lighthouse I'm struck by the complexity of Woolf's sentences; how she starts in one place and ends up in another place, not really confusing the reader as she goes along. And some sentences are quite long. We start in James's POV but we don't stay there. And Woolf accomplishes it all gracefully and relatively clearly, I would say. Masterful rich writing!
I have to say that I am getting confused by her complex sentences starting in one POV and ending, with various parenthetical interspersed, in another POV. This part of her writing is work for me. I love her insights and depth and fluidity of interiority, like a stone being skipped on water, and the humor, but not the confusion. This is, remarkably, my first reading of Woolf.
Every time I reach “It was fringed with joy” Woolf pauses me. Yes, I say. More is coming, life, and grownups and their pinched perception. Still, for a moment, “It was.” I recall that Shirley Hazzard said she believed that imagination, wonder, needs be identified early, and nurtured. And C. S. Lewis hoped we would be surprised by joy. James knows this all. It is how he’s made and outfitted within. . . . Here, to dip in to, along the way: https://eyeondesign.aiga.org/the-sisterly-collusion-behind-vanessa-bells-book-covers-for-virginia-woolf/
Great article. Thanks!
This was fascinating - thanks for posting.
I am one of eight children and so it is not so hard for me to take them all in. What is interesting is that Mrs. Ramsey was 44 years old when she had James.
First impressions: enthusiastic, supportive mother, welcoming to (almost) all guests, while caring for eight children; difficult, domineering father; the “odious” atheist Tansley, a subject of mockery (and on whom a lot of ink is spilled); daughters wishing for themselves “a wilder life; not always taking care of some man or other”; young James, joyful but apparently resentful of his oppressive father; sycophants parodying Mr. Ramsay (“he said it would rain; they said it would be a positive tornado“); and Lily Briscoe, all but dismissed by Mrs. Ramsay (“she would never marry; one cannot take her painting very seriously; she was an independent little creature”).
First time reading Woolf's fiction, and I'm not sure I'm approaching it in the right way. I keep wanting a character list (so many children!) and the only plot I can discern is "James wants to go to the lighthouse." I keep wanting more action or plot, but I'm hopeful that this reading group will teach me how to read Woolf more effectively. So far, I can only say that Woolf seems to be all about the "vibes" of what's going on rather than "what's going on."
Hi! I love that you're jumping in. It may not feel driven by plot, but there are micro (and macro) stories that Woolf tells as she explores the interiority of the characters and their relationship to each other and their surroundings. There are all the aspects of a more momentum-driven plot: tension, suffering, consequences, exhilaration - just executed with a finer brush. There's also a lot of pleasure in the sound and movement of the sentences. I still have yet to come across a writer who can move so seamlessly between points-of-view...on a form level, it's still groundbreaking (and magical). Hope you enjoy : )
I am definitely learning all about everything you've mentioned (the micro-story of the servant whose father is dying of cancer in the mountains of Switzerland!) and loving it all.
I'm a high school English teacher, so I'm always looking for or wondering "How could I convince students to read and possibly love this book?"
I'm still meditating on what "hook" I would use for TTL (if I ever chose to teach it). Right now, I'm fairly convinced this book--more than many others--is for adults only, not teenagers. [I do know of high school classes that read it though].
I'm thinking (right now) that the book's hook is form and aesthetic primarily, which are not really selling points for most teens. They want to feel, and they love plot. This book definitely will make you feel, but it takes a lot of work to get there, a lot of stillness and attention to every single word. But yes, I am enjoying TTL so much. Thank you!
I would just say that I fell in love with TTL when I was around 18 or 19, and it was one of the first books I ever felt spoke to me on the level of spirit. I actually felt more connected to it than more traditional plot-driven books. I might just encourage you to consider the kids like me as well - the poetic kids, the music kids, the kids interested in sounds and minds and ideas. If it helps, a lot of kids are interested in “streams of consciousness” - I remember HS and college friends starting to discover that modernist approach and finding it to be really powerful for them. Very fucking *cool,* even (I remember kids would try out their own “automatic” writing with whatever bubbled up or play with those longer sentences). That freedom - and the angle of this kind of work as groundbreaking and radical - was a pretty big hook. The other was the intensity of the psychological interiors, the way she surfaces what is usually private perception, and the ideas or questions she raises - esp as a kid with intense feelings and thoughts trying to understand my own mind at that age and the viewpoints of others around me.
Anyway, just some food for thought! I think you’re so lucky to have that job.
I am always in awe of how deftly Woolf moves between points-of-view. But she is aware of potential confusion on the part of the reader and so the occasional little markers--“(James thought)”--seem to be her way of providing clarity.
On this reading, I’m noticing how the shifts in POV add movement and life to the narrative. We learn, at the end of chapter 3, that Mrs. Ramsey is sitting for a portrait. We had not known this before and we’ve experienced so much while she’s been reasonably still.
I was struck by this, too. A flurry of shifting perspectives, thoughts and locations, all during a portrait sitting. Woolf’s audacious.
As I read by another commentator, Woolf is creating a consistent narrative without a dominant "I".
I just read Ali Smith, The Accidental, which shifts POV seemingly without warning. But her voices are more contrasting than VW's and somehow easier to track. There is something about the pure strength of VW's narrative voice that casts a very strong shade over all of her characters - and i find I have to read carefully to track the shifts. As you wrote above - there are clear signposts. I read TTLH exactly one year ago with Elizabeth Gaffney's the24hourroom.org and marked many of the POV shifts then with blue highlight in my kindle. As I read the novel for the second time, it is interesting seeing this shifts as they approach.
Oh, I love that, Sadie, highlighting the changes. Must make for a very different read this time through.
I can only shake my head when, at the end of I we have Charles full of pride with the most beautiful woman, and at the beginning of II , repeats the worn line to James about not going to the lighthouse. Anyone would get that would piss off Mrs. Ramsay. Is he that clueless?!
I have been accused of something like this!: "also with some secret conceit at his own accuracy of judgement. What he said was true. It was always true. He was incapable of untruth; never tampered with a fact; never altered a disagreeable word to suit the pleasure or convenience of any mortal being, least of all of his own children.."
Here, a lovely, complicated passage, something to pause on for a long time: "her daughters, Prue, Nancy, Rose—could sport with infidel ideas which they had brewed for themselves of a life different from hers; in Paris, perhaps; a wilder life; not always taking care of some man or other; for there was in all their minds a mute questioning of deference and chivalry, of the Bank of England and the Indian Empire, of ringed fingers and lace, though to them all there was something in this of the essence of beauty, which called out the manliness in their girlish hearts, and made them, as they sat at table beneath their mother’s eyes, honour her strange severity, her extreme courtesy..."
An insightful mother's understanding of her intelligent daughters' pushing away of and yet still the pull of the past, of homeland and of myth and authority that mother represents.
Ha, timeless! Especially now with social media: "Strife, divisions, difference of opinion, prejudices twisted into the very fibre of being, oh, that they should begin so early, Mrs. Ramsay deplored. They were so critical, her children."
I loved this generational unease, too. It's not quite our generational unease. Nancy, Rose, and Prue – have perfidious ideas about their mother’s sense of gender relations, yet their mute questioning of the Bank of England and the Indian Empire isn’t a contemporary question of colonization or a global economy, nor is it a questioning, yet, of whether one of them might like to “negotiate treaties” or “control finance” herself. The yearning for a different life than their mother’s manages to eke out only as a desire for “a wilder life, in Paris, perhaps, not always taking care of some man or other.”
And at other moments they still see her (as so many daughters see their mothers, at some moment or other) as a Queen.
I love what you say here about Woolf paying respect to Mrs. Ramsay's art of the home, of people. With every read of this book I'm struck by the moment she and Tansley make it to the quay. It seems like Mrs. Ramsay has this really true, impulsive expression of desire and admiration for the "the green sand dunes with the wild flowing grasses on them, which always seemed to be running away into some moon country, uninhabited of men." That, then followed by this incredibly controlled sentence, where Mrs. Ramsay dutifully remembers that's the view her husband loves. Her uninhibited exclamation of beauty returns to the life of "men", which might mean her own role as a woman, sure, but also seems to be a return to the earthbound. She knows she can't stay in that place of wildness, of "moon country"! Might she become like a Lily if she does?
My first reading of Woolf: Not much action, but much is going on in Mrs. Ramsey’s thoughts--her compassion, frustrations, enthusiasm--as the waves on the beach warn her “that it was all ephemeral”.
This is my favorite book and Woolf my favorite author and even 45 years later after the first time reading I am still amazed at her writing. She elevates ordinary life to a life outside of the ordinary finding the essentialness in everything and knows that relationships are the necessary contrast to knowing ourselves. She is extraordinary.
And to think that Woolf never had children makes her portrait of a mother's interior life even more extraordinary.
Such a great summary of all three first sections of “To the Lighthouse." I am taken in by the movement between the shifting points of view that all show the vulnerabilities of the primary characters thus far: Mrs. Ramsey’s self-awareness of her own suffocating gentility (she seems to despise Tansley as much as she needs to “invite” him); the children’s certainty they will outdo their mother even as they idolize her; and Tansley’s class sensitivity.
I am also struck by the circus advertisement. I looked up the date of Nabokov’s “Spring in Fialta,” well known for its circus advertisement element. I can’t help but wonder if he read this.
Yes! I was thinking of Spring in Fialta too!
Reading To the Lighthouse again, I'm struck by Woolf's keen use of verticality to peer beyond the simplicity of sitting for a picture (Lily's picture!) or a child's anticipation of a trip to a lighthouse, and how the layered situation inhabited by these characters, and their power dynamics, urges me to read on with great interest. Looking forward to more of everyone's insights here!
So lovely to be reading with people again! After reading some contemporary novels recently, I really had to adjust to the long (long) sentences that one has to retrace and reread. I am keeping Welty’s interesting comment, that there is not a “shadow of detachment” in the novel before me as I go. So much interior stuff going on in these short opening chapters!
This is my first time reading Virginia Woolf and the long sentences were at times confusing. Prior to this book I had read that Woolf writes in a stream of consciousness. Any tips on how to understand her writing better? I loved reading all the comments posted today and it has helped with the understanding of what has transpired in the first few chapters. The odious little atheist and James's severe anger at his father is something to keep an eye on.
James’ strong reaction to his father felt very true to a passionate young child absorbed with his mother and the writing - if there had been an axe...- was the first moment I felt enlivened/in awe of her humor.
I am thrilled to be back in the world Virginia Woolf has created for us. Others have mentioned, she is a favorite author; so she is to me -- or she used to be, back when I read her books.
And yet I have not reread any of her books in years, so I'm nervous. I'm longing to love them, and her!, just as much now, or more, than I did before.
Rereading To The Lighthouse I'm struck by the complexity of Woolf's sentences; how she starts in one place and ends up in another place, not really confusing the reader as she goes along. And some sentences are quite long. We start in James's POV but we don't stay there. And Woolf accomplishes it all gracefully and relatively clearly, I would say. Masterful rich writing!
I have to say that I am getting confused by her complex sentences starting in one POV and ending, with various parenthetical interspersed, in another POV. This part of her writing is work for me. I love her insights and depth and fluidity of interiority, like a stone being skipped on water, and the humor, but not the confusion. This is, remarkably, my first reading of Woolf.