pudd'nhead wilson: chapter four

The new Tom (which was previously Chambers) turns out to be a spoiled baby. He never stops crying and gives Roxy troubles. One of his most prominent tiring acts is when he "holds his breath" and almost kills himself from suffocation. If I'm not mistaken, Dr. Adams once told us a story about how Mark Twain had a very strong memory and remembered one incident in his infancy when he (held his breath and) cried in order to get his parents attention. Well, I guess this life of infant Tom is taken from Mark Twain's own infancy.

How "Tom" finally becomes a very spoiled child and troubles his slave (who is actually his mother) and "Chambers" rises so many questions on my part. However, I will keep this question until a bit later, after I explore some more of this kid's naughtiness.

"Tom" becomes so very spoiled and troublesome for Roxy that Roxy one day kinda regrets why she has exchanged the babies. This fake master finally becomes her real master and troubles in his every single waking hour.

For "Chambers", "Tom" becomes a kind of threat that he can finally face lightheartedly. Once he tries to fight against "Tom" and put him down. However, his status as a slave-boy makes him face his master's ("Tom"'s ostensible father) beating on his butt. Later, he always succumbs to whatever things tom want. However, there's a blessing in disguise from this thing. He turns into a stronger boy due to a lot of practice--by practice I mean doing anything to save his little master from any danger, either from his enemies as well as from other things that endanger his life.

However, there are times when "Tom" cannot escape his enemies' bully because "Chambers" is away doing other things for him. Later, "Tom"'s dependence on "Chambers"'s help gives him a bad nickname, "niggerpappy's son". "Tom" hates "Chambers" even more, despite all the helps that "Chambers" has given him.

A twist of the plot occurs when Percy Driscoll, the big master, "Tom"'s ostensible father dies. He sets Roxy free from slavery. "Tom" wants his father to sell "Chambers" down the river, but his father refuses it. Being freed, Roxy decides to work as a chambermaid in a steamboat. However, there is one passing test that she has to go through--actually it's not a test at all, it's just Roxy sees it as something that can hinder her steps--that is, Pudd'nhead Wilson's fingerprint copying of hers and the two boys's. This time, Pudd'nhead Wilson senses a kind of fear on Roxy's part from Roxy's curious behavior, bringing a horseshoe everytime she goes to Wilson to have her boys' fingerprints taken.

pudd'nhead wilson: chapter three

Roxy feels a kind of fear that her son will be sold down the river by his master. She even thinks about killing her own son because she doesn't have the heart to see him sold down the river, and live the same fate as she does.

She sees her master's son, who actually isn't any more handsome than her own son but enjoys a totally different fate that her son. She also complains how her son, who has done no sins in his life but has to experience such a terrible life and faces the threat to be sold down the river any time.

It's a very good serious mourning about the fate of a slave. She actually questions the value in the world. She questions why white people can enjoy easy life while the black people have to experience such a difficult life and are prone to being sold down the river. However, she doesn't have any question about the origin of slalvery and so on--she just questions the present condition, without tracing to the origin of the slavery.

Later, she has the idea of exchanging the baby, and there she sees how actually her son is not any different from her master's son. And she believes that her master will not recognize because one time, when she was washing the babies, her master asked about which one his son was.

This scene shows how actually rich people do not really care about their children's detail, especially fathers. They are not balanced in their life. They might be too serious with their daily jobs, but they do not spend enough time giving love to their children, so that they can't even differentiate their children from other people's children.

Later, Roxy realizes how actually the idea doesn't come up from thin air. She previously listened to a sermon in the black people's church about a slave who changed her son with her queen's son. And since the one who told this story is preacher, she thinks it is not a sin. Therefore, she thinks about what she has done as something good and starts seeing it happily. Here, we can get the explanation of Roxy's "brilliant" idea, such brilliant an idea, although rather wicked, is actually infused by someone cleverer--and here, it could be Twain's other criticisim on religious stories, that is, giving bad examples, if not explained correctly (remember Mark Twain's letter to a librarian in Brooklyn library in response to the news about the ban of his book The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn from the library saying that "The Adventures of Huck Finn" is an adult book and no children should read the book without their parents watching and explaining them before it can give bad impact just like what Bible did to him as a child).

What makes the situation very conducive for this baby change is the selling of the three slaves indicted of stealing money. The three slaves are the one who know the difference of the two babies (see, it shows how the slaves spend more time with the two babies and can differentiate one from another). This shows Mark Twain perfect planning on the logics of the story, despite the fact that Mark Twain is known to be someone who is very bad at plotting.

If there is one person whom Roxy is rather afraid of, it will be Pudd'nhead Wilson who has taken the two babies fingerprints. Roxy also knows that Pudd'nhead Wilson is not a "pudding head", he might even be the smartest person in the town. This might be Roxy's brilliance. Only brilliant people can see other people's brilliance. HOWEVER, this is the part that I guess needs explanation. Roxy seems to know the importance of a fingerprint, and she does seem to know that everybody has different fingerprint from other people. I'm not sure myself about it, but I wonder whether it was already a common knowledge in 1830s that people have different fingerprints.

pudd'nhead wilson: the second chapter

now we're on the second chapter of pudd'n head wilson. following points are the most vividly seen through a first swipe reading, :D. this list will enlarge with the course of time.

Wilson opens a law service as an attorney, but his unlucky remark keeps prospective clients away from him
--> he leaves the small office that he rents in the town, and decides to stay at his home and opens the same business here, but only gaining small-scale clients for trivial stuffs.

Wilson grows interest in palmistry
--> since it enlarges his

He sees hears Roxy and another Jasper quarrelling about something and threatening each other with harsh words
--> it shows that there's something serious between them, and here, Wilson's hobby in collecting fingerprints makes him take Roxy's and the two babies in her craddle's fingerprints.

In this scene, Roxy is introduced as a one-sixteenth black girl--although she's as fair as other white women, she speaks the way black people do.

Later in this chapter, Roxy's master shows a kind of anger because he senses a theft or two among his slaves
--> in this scene, we are introduced to one of the scariest things for black people, that is, being sold "DOWN THE RIVER".

pudd'nhead wilson: the first chapter

so sorry for being absent quite some time. so sorry too for not finishing my close reading on the portrait of a lady. it was awesome actually, but i could hardly catch up with the class, hehehe... so i decided to stop for a while and concentrate on what i had to do in the class.

and now, i'm starting another book by twain (actually after a portrait of the lady we discussed the adventures of huckleberry finn in the class, but i didn't have time to record the close reading here). hope this time i can do a bit better than the other day.

so, here comes the important points in the first chapter. actually i could've been a bit difficult for me to understand the texts, specially regarding the dense description in the first several chapters, due to the specific vocabulary used there... however, thanks to the online version that has illustrations, i could understand the text quite well:

The opening "Tell the truth--but get the trick"
--> tricky, it has the impression of telling us the truth but with a slightly different way, with a witty way? or with a misleading way?

The house description with the cat
--> very peaceful and nice house where people live in harmony with the nature, with honeysuckle and all, and the sight of the cat impresses leisure, because cat itself is known as a lazy animal...

A home without a cat [...] may be a perfect home, [...], but how can it prove title?
--> well-fed cat can prove someone's wealth?

Description of the main street
--> it's like a leisure area where rich people live, with tree trunks covered by a kind of wooden boxing.

Candy-striped pole
--> in Venice nobility here only barbershop.

tinpots-wreathed lofty pole
--> actually ugly, but funny.

About Dawson's Landing economy
--> in keeping with the leisurely sight, the town is a slow-growing one, it has a rich "slave-worked grain and pork country back of it"

York Leicester Driscoll
--> proud of his Virginian ancestry, hospitable and rather formal, keeping up his old tradition

Parade of character
--> the judge, his sister, Pembroke Howard

the judge and his sister are not happy
--> no child and "never" to be happy, told since first off

religion
--> judge free thinker, sister presbyterian, the lawyer Howard a devoted presbyterian, so they're scottish descendant

the half dog incident
--> so smart, but the locals, who are fools, think he is fool for the joke. A small joke but the locals discussed it foolishly exhaustively

Another Important Mosaic Piece in the Portrait of a Lady

Sure, I haven't finished reading The Portrait of a Lady. But I enjoy putting my in-progress analysis into writing. And now, in chapter 19, especially in the part where Isabel encounters Madame Merme, I do think I have to take a significant break. This is a very important chapter, because it is here that Isabel has a lot of input to build her personality. She even admits to find someone she really admires, and cares to imitate. By 'imitate' here I mean the Isabellian sense of the word (implied in the following paragraphs). Coming is the my humble explication of the part, with now and then discussion about my general interpretation of what Mr. James wants to do with this novel, in the light of my reading of the novel so far, :).

In this chapter Madame Merme appears all of a sudden as a graceful woman who plays the piano very beautifully. Her appearance on the screen shows a mystery. What is more mysterious that someone playing the piano very beautifully seen from behind? We even hears Mrs. Touchett saying that M. Merme likes to be mysterious.

One thing that really interests Isabel is the Madame's ability to use her reasons well without leaving her emotional touch. In a 20th century expression, we can probably say that the Madame was from Venus but has visited Mars so frequently that she masters Martian codes of conduct. Later in this part, we will see how she reasonably analyzes Mrs. Touchett's flaws as being too not spiritual (or too shallow?) in her virtues (p. 198-199) and how she puts an emotional touch in analyzing Ralph and his father escaping the fact that they are Americans.

Another thing that is of great importance for Isabel is the Madame's talents, aptitudes, and accomplishments without being to absorbed every time she exercises any of those qualities. She is good at various thing or, in Ralph's words, “she plays everything beautifully.” She plays the piano very well, and likes painting with water color, not to mention her ability to appreciate paintings, including her friend's, Mr. Osmond's, works. However, the noteworthy part is when Isabel says that “she [is] never preoccupied, she never force[s] too hard.” All those capabilities don't seem to alienate her. If Isabel does dream of having an ideal freedom, Madame Merme could be the best example of someone who has freedom without being occupied by the freedom, because being so absorbed in freedom means not free. 

We can also see how Madame Merme always tries to avoid staying in the melancholia of the past and shows great interest in new things. Isabel finds it difficult to make the Madame excitedly interested in what she tells her, because Madame Merme herself has been in those situations and when she tells Isabel about it, she doesn't use “the tone of triumph of of boastfulness” but tells them “like a grave confessions.” In stead of boring Isabel with her never-ending stories of her youth, she times and times again asks Isabel to tell about herself and about America. She is eager to know contemporaneity.  

All this quality is so delightful for Isabel, and she considers her imitate worthy. Up to this chapter, this is the first time that Isabel shows an open eagerness to be influenced by someone. With Madame Merme, Isabel thinks she “needn't be afraid of becoming too pliable”. This is so noteworthy because so far, she has tried to be very free. Even a prospect of marriage with someone who promises her freedom and adventures seems to her a confinement—well, all she wants is a first-hand experience. In her previous conversation with Miss Stackpole, Isabel states that her idea of happiness is “[a] swift carriage, of a dark night, rattling with four horses over roads that one can't see”—which, sorry, sounds too Nitzschean, so analogous to Nitzsche's imagery of freedom of thought and experiment as “sailing in the stormy sea” (I hope I can write a separate post on it :D). 

Mrs. Touchett, in a very inexplicit manner, reveals her motif of taking up Isabel with her: to educate her. She says that she has brought Isabel out of America and “wish[es] to do the best” for her, and make her acquainted with the Madame, “who has no faults”, is a very good way to educate her. She probably wants to “Mrs. Touchettize” Isabel, considering that she has the smartness and other qualities that the young Mrs. Touchett has. However, it apparently shows that Isabel is not that malleable. Isabel, at this point, is enlightened enough to choose what she thinks right and whom she lets herself to be influenced by. It might explain why Isabel always presents herself in some kind of alertness in every conversation with Mrs. Touchett, despite the fact that Mrs. Touchett is the one who has brought her to Europe and who, for most people, should have been seen with awe. Isabel shows an air of ungratefulness in those coversations with Mrs. Touchett. She even says, in regards with Madame Merme, that she “like[s] her better than ... [Mrs. Touchett's] desccription of her”. She persists on seeing things through her own perspectives. She is not at all in the shadows of Mrs. Touchett, who should have been her matron.

If there are things that Isabel found rather disagreeable in Madame Merme, they are her idea of identity and her being “not natural” in her behavior. To Madame Merme, one always has a “shell”. By “shell”, the Madame means “the whole envelope of circumstances”, which includes a nationality, appearance, a house, etc. To Isabel, who is in the euphoria of her freedom, this idea is somewhat unacceptable and she sees this shell as a limit. Here is the point where Isabel starts seeing her more like a “sparring partner” than an idol. Therefore, it is no wonder how the narrator sees the Madame's departure from the court optimistically as “the beginning of a friendship”. And Madame Merme's confession of her unrealized dreams, although doesn't seem very bad to Isabel, should be counted as something that is also of importance in Isabel's personality building. In addition to this, the Madame's being too cultivated and not natural in her behavior. To Isabel, the Madame's “nature [has] been too much overlaid by custom and her angles too much smoothed [...] too flexible, too supple; [...] too finished, too civilized”. All these don't seem to suit Isabel's idea of happiness which lies in uncertainty, adventure, instability (as the sentence I quoted two paragraphs ago says).

I see now how Isabel has gone through several stages of analysis and value search. At first, she finds the quality of Mrs. Touchett as someone independent but then she finds that she is too free and not loyal to the husband she has chosen. She has also observes how Ralph and Miss Stackpole are in different poles in terms of nationality and she herself doesn't openly subscribe to either Ralph's or Miss Stackpole's ideas of identity. In this chapter, Isabel learns a lot about freedom and behavior towards herself and others from Madame Merme. And the unconcluded discussion about identity between Isabel and Madame Merme seems to shed a light on the next journey that Isabel will experience, or on the next mosaic pieces that Mr. James put to create a portrait of this very lady.

equally promising, yet not delightful proposals

I would rather not separate chapter 12 and 13 because they seem to equally shows the initial sign of the upcoming crisis that Isabel has to face in most of her life, that related to spouse. In these two chapters, Isabel is proposed by two different people of promising financial status, each with pros and cons.

Lord Warburton visits Gardencourt to propose Isabel. Although Isabel has knows early on that he would propose her, she finds it also difficult to reject his proposal in person. To her, the Lord is someone with a fixed position and marrying him will only end her independence, which has just started. He has a stable position, while she has her own orbit.

Meanwhile for Lord Warburton, proposing Isabel also entails significant consequences. Among others, the reason is because Isabel is from a ‘queer’ country with its different culture and it will be difficult to make her accepted in his society, the society of English noblemen.

In the next chapter, Isabel consults her uncle about her problem. It is quite curious why she wants to discuss this with her uncle rather than her aunt. It is probably her uncle’s objectivity (he doesn’t have any interest behind Isabel’s choice), his surely more comprehension about the Lord, and the fact that her aunt tends to command or dictate which to choose that makes her choose to consult her uncle. So vague as to what this might imply, Isabel shows (or starts to show) her independence even from Mrs. Touchett, the woman who takes her up and, possibly, wishes to teach her about the real life. This might lead to a conflict between Isabel and her aunt. As for the result of her consulting the uncle itself, Isabel doesn’t seem to get any clearer idea of the cause of her rejection. Or, to put better, she actually finds the reason why she rejects the Lord herself, that is, she loves her independence too much to sacrifice it in replace of marriage.

There’s a small fact that might escape our attention, that is, Mr. Touchett himself doesn’t really know how to answer such a dilemma. It is the second time that he avoids to discuss further or avoids being in opposition with Isabel, the first time being previous discussion about whether or not the Lord is a real radical. Is it possible that this very tendency of Mr. Touchett that has made her wife so free from him?

Later on chapter 13, we will find the narrator’s description of Mr. Goodwood. He is a man from Albany who previously proposed to marry her but she rejected without giving a clear cut answer. Mr. Goodwood is a successful young man who comes also from a wealthy family. He is the kind of man that American women might dream. But to her, he is not satisfactory because she doesn’t see him as a delightful person. He is an adventurous man, a character that is very likely to delight Isabel, but he is too stiff (if it pleases anybody, I would gladly relate his name to his character as a stiff person; we all know that a good wood is a strong one, an uneasilybreakable, :D) and seems to get difficulties to adapt to different situations. The narrator also contrasts him to Lord Warburton who can easily adapt to different situation and also appears more delightful to Isabel. (I think I had to make a confession at this point: in the discussion today, I said that Mr. Goodwood and Lord Warburton are totally different from each other in the sense that the Lord has a strong characteristic while Mr. Goodwood has a weak character. Mr. Goodwood says in his letter that he will move anywhere as Isabel pleases, which to me shows his being weak in character. I really forgot about this comparison in chapter 13, although I had underlined this part. Excuse my forgetfulness, than :D).

The next scene in this chapter shows Miss Stackpole’s persuading Ralph to invite Mr. Goodwood to Gardencourt so that he has an opportunity to talk with Isabel while he is in England. This scene, at the least, besides asserting how, as implied in the previous chapters, Miss Stackpole doesn’t respect someone’s private business, shows how Mr. Goodwood is somewhat on the same wavelength with Miss Stackpole by rejecting Ralph’s offer without any strong reasons—we will find the explanation for this rejection later in chapter 16.

more stackpoleness

and now, in chapter 11, mrs. touchett starts to touch upon  henrietta. she doesn't show any interest in nor respect to henrietta--well, she surely doesn't need to. to her, henrietta is just a 'newspaper-woman'. i try to fathom which nature of newspaper that makes it seem trivial. is it the fact that newspaper just transfers information, as opposed to a book that gives analysis? she wonders how a smart girl like isabel selects her as a close friend. here, again, the character of henrietta as a person that goes with the public, a person without individuality, a person with 'boarding-house' view, exclaimed, this time through the mouth of mrs. touchett. i might have considered this a redundancy of characterization if i hadn't found that after saying this mrs. touchett pointed out isabel's being an absolutist, someone who doesn't synthesize ideas. to henrietta, her culture is either good or bad. there's nothing in the middle. she doesn't see things from different perspectives. to her, everything should be measured against america. 

in the second half of the chapter, we will find henrietta, in her conversation with isabel about mr. goodwood, indirectly approves mrs. touchett's judgement of henrietta being absolutist. in this conversation, henrietta accuses isabel as having been changed by the new things around her. by new things, henrientta means mrs. touchett and the gardencourt's people. while isabel is open to new things or ideas so that she 'can choose', henrietta things that she will open her eyes wide to see new things and receive new ideas but those new things should not 'interfere with the old ones'. 

in this chapter, james has put the characters of henrietta very clear. i'm suspicious whether this too 'strong' (in the negative sense, of course) a character of henrietta will remain intact for the rest of the book, unless something really serious happens and makes her change her mindset. so far, until the end of chapter 15 the character of henrietta doesn't seem to change. there are occasions when henrietta looks prominent, such as the scenes when lord warburton and his sister visits them in gardencourt, but her prominence in these scene seem to 'merely' assert her already clear characterization with more and more examples of her judging englishmen and english culture against american standards. if later she seems to succumb to the approach of mr. bantling, to me it's not because she has changed, but it's more because mr. bantling knows how to approach such a superior woman. therefore, from here until the end of chapter 15, i will not touch upon the matter of isabel too much. 

miss henrietta stackpole under observation, the irony of henrietta and ralph

the next chapter (ch. 10) sees the observation of miss stackpole the journalist. i don't need to say that she is the representation of industrious american professionals at that time, because the text itself asserts that. 

she's a correspondent of 'the interviewer'. she is travelling to england to see life and report it to her newspaper. she's interested in things related to human, she likes observing people from different cultures (or, i think it's better to say that she likes pointing out how they are different from her tradition and, even worse, how they are often worse than her tradition). at the beginning, to her, everything is reportable, without considering her objects' right not to like being reported. and here isabel shows her that her uncle and cousin might not like her reporting their life in gardencourt. 

in her conversation with ralph, in which she suggests him to get married, we can see one of miss stackpole's characters, that is, acting based on what is communally good (for people in her culture, American culture). she always says that one thing is good because other people do it. fir instance, marriage. to her marriage is everybody's duty. she doesn't seem to question the basic value behind marriage, thus she doesn't want to know certain condition when someone decides to put off marriages or not to get married altogether. she is a good example of the people of the crowd. 

later, in a chat session between ralph and isabel, we can read how miss stackpole is discussed and analyzed. isabel asserts that miss stackpole is 'the emanation of the great democracy', that is, america. and ralph doesn't like miss stackpole on that ground. 

this short notion of ralph's dislike of her patriotism somehow shows another character of ralph, being cosmopolitan, which is very normal for someone who has lived in a foreign country for so long and does not see the importance of holding tight the tradition from his homecountry while living in a foreign country. we can infer that he has known the insignificance of inherited custom. however, he doesn't seem to show tendency to be in accordance with the custom of the place where he lives. he is the kind of people who is either in the tense between succumbing to the foreign setting where he lives and leaving his country's custom or really free from any constraint of customs. 

there's an irony here, while miss stackpole who has a very liberal-like profession as a journalistand can travel to another continent separated by an ocean from her homeland cannot really free her mind from the constraint of her traidition, ralph who has a serious illness and cannot even choose a profession, inspite of his knowledge, is totally free from any custom and has a real freedom to do anything he wants, to be a real individual, to be different, or to be himself (as mtv generation suggests). 

in the lockleigh

in the next chapter (ch. 9) we can see isabel visiting the lord's castle. in this part isabel's characteristics are revealed even more, this time through the eyes of the lord and mildred (the lord's sister). isabel is interested in mildred's simplicity which is reflected in the way she sees the lord and from her interest in crewels. she sees that mildred says herself and her family being liberal, while she seems not to understand the essence of being liberal. crewel is in deed not poor people's hobby. and liberal people tend to give their belonging for the betterment of other people, not keeping wealth for themselves. seeing mildred, isabel learns something and this something is useful to develop herself.

from her conversation with the lord, we see again how she is the kind of freedom adoring person who only amuses herself with what she observes. it is asserted by her saying that she doesn't judge, she just enjoys.

isabel archer seeing lord warburton

after the minor climax that briefly emphasizes isabel's will to freedom (i mean the incident of mrs. toughett asking her not to stay up late in the company of people not from her circle of relatives), isabel talks even more with lord warburton, because the lord told her about many things, including his picturesque mansion, that interest isabel. from the talk, isabel can somewhat 'read' and 'theorize' the lord. to her, the lord is rather ideal because he is the kind of rich people who go for equality and other radical ideas and in the real life he doesn't seem to make a merit of his wealth. this makes him rather special in her eyes. however, the lord doesn't seem to know that isabel just messes up with him when she asks about 'artless things and the lord answers very seriously'.

later, from her conversation with her cousin, ralph touchett, she knows that the lord, despite his high position and importance, never 'takes himself seriously'.

here is i can see for the first time that isabel and ralph shares the same interest (or need?) in formulating or structuring things. an small overinterpretation might lead me to say that this shows the real trait of modern people in cartesian sense. it's not a sin for james to do this. it is indeed the trait of modern people who always try to understand, and later to control, everything that shows up before their eyes. james himself has shown another character of his that has the same characteristic, that is, winterbourne of daisy miller and dr. sloper in washington square. however, if we see deeper, we might find the same tendency in other literary works produced by 'englightened' authors who adhere to philosophical thoughts from descartes to those before nietzsche.

anyway, let us now continue to the scene when isabel tries to ask her uncle about lord warburton. her uncle, mr. touchett, has a different opinion about the lord. to him, the lord is the kind of person--usually from the upper class--who talk about changes in any occasion without every trying hard enough to realize those ideas. mr. touchett even emphasizes that those upper class people only take their ideas from theories--by theories i assume he means philosophical thoughts that have been adhered by intellectuals--and they use them as amusement only. in other words, he consider them to be grasping the theories as 'mere' knowledge, not as something that they really believe wholeheartedly and then realize them with all their might. he uses their luxurious way of life as an example that can prove this. however, after isabel protests that the lord is a nice person and might not be a humbug, her uncle tells her that the lord is an amiable person and he will even be safe during a revolution, because everybody seems to like him. here the uncle makes his point: no matter what, the lord is not a real radical.

in this chapter, we can see another character of isabel revealed, that she is liberal as well as conservative. and she says that she is 'a little bit of everything'. it is true that we cannot wholly believe in what isabel says, since several times she doesn't say what she really feels (we will find it later in the chapter when ralph interrogates her about her rejection of warburton's decision, but in this chapter 8, we can say that what isabel says does reflect her true self. i would say that this is another significant small stroke on the canvas that will result in the complete portrait of this lady.

this time's reading method

now that i've been through the first fifth of the book, i can try to formulate several things that flashed in my mind during my reading.

first of all, let me assert my way of reading this time. i say this to emphasize that i can easily change my reading method, as easily as smiling and as fast as blinking.

this time, i'd like to read all and make notes and stop on interesting points in the book. this way, i can't promise you how long the result of my reading will be. if i'm lucky enough, i'm gonna be able to finish the book. if i'm one of the blessed literary geeks on earth, i might end up with a writing comparable--in size--to one of the eight chapters of mr. nabokov's lectures on literature.

ah, once again, i gotta emphasize that i'll be interested in small amusing things than grand ideas.

Ralph Touchett, the Visionless Man

The second (probably) important character of the novel is Ralph Touchett, son of Mrs. Touchett, who is sickly but smart, and having no optimism. Since the first chapter, Ralph shows his closeness with his father and nurses his father, despite the fact that he is not a healthy person himself. Their condition has gathered them under the same roof pretty much all the time.

One of the very protruding traits Ralph shows is the lack of optimism. James implies this with Ralph putting his hands in the pocket all the time, as if someone who avoid being involved in certain things in life. He doesn't expect anything from life anymore. He had a good career until it was found that he got lung problem. Since then, he doesn't take active part in life. However, his reception of the condition that he suffers makes him at least go on living.

He finds Isabel a very nice girl and he is comfortable with her at first sight. This can be seen from the way he would give his dog to Isabel. We all know that dogs are very close friend to Americans. Americans treat their dog like they do to family members. When someone is willing to give his dog to another person, it means that they trust that person. Later, Ralph likes the cousin even more. So interested as he is in Isabel, he even questions himself whether he is in love with the girl.

Here, Ralph is called a philosopher and it is proven from the way he doesn't directly call his interest in Isabel as a “love”. He questions this after being close with for some time. Apart from this time, he only tries to fathom what is so interesting with Isabel that has captures his heart.

He is very suspicious about his mother's intention of taking Isabel with her to Europe. He interrogates his mother about it. At first, his mother seems to keep her reason of taking Isabel with her. Or, perhaps, she doesn't want to do something other than taking Isabel with her to teach her more about life. However, ineluctably, what Ralph does triggers me to think that there's something behind her mother's intention to take Isabel with her to London and European countries.

Blogged with the Flock Browser

Isabel Archer of The Portrait of a Lady, the first scratch of freedom-lover

From the first seven chapters of The Portrait of a Lady, we get a somewhat clear idea that what Henry James wants to “play” with, that is, freedom. We can see how freedom is implicitly as well as explicitly expressed by the narrator and the characters of the novel.

After the first chapter, the “pleasantries chapter”, that basically sets the tone of the first setting—there will probably be many other settings, considering the size of the novel—the second chapter opens with the arrival of “our heroine”. She is an American girl who has won Mrs. Touchett's heart because of her genius. Isabel Archer, thus our heroine is called, is described as a New York girl with unquenchable thirst of knowledge. She reads heavy books found in her house. Her genius makes her contemporaries look pedestrian. She has

Further with the text, we will find how, in addition to her genius, she is also a very self-conscious person. This can be seen from the way, in contrast to the fact that that she doesn't really care about compliments addressed to her by other people, she shrinks when she hears other people say about her negative sides. She always tries to be as good as possible. Or, it might be appropriate if we label her a “perfectionist”.

Another character of Isabel that is noteworthy is her “Americanness”. She longs for freedom and tries to avoid being confined by rules when her consciousness is against them. The strongest proof for this is her questioning why Mrs. Troucett doesn't let her stay up late in the company of a young man who is not from her circle of relatives. She assertively says that she wants to know about things she shouldn't do not to disobey (or obey) them, but in order she can choose.

It is here that the several traits of American girls of that age are touched on. Mr. Touchett says that most of American girls are engaged. Besides the way Mrs. Touchett's saying that Isabel shouldn't stay up late in the company of Lord Warburton because she is not in Albany implies that in Albany it might be common to see ladies staying up late with gentlemen who are not their relatives.

Besides, there is also a slight flirt with the contemporary novels in that age. The way Mr. Touchett explains to Isabel that sometimes novels are not accurate because their authors don't listen to people carefully before writing their novels show the kind of literature that Henry James tries to avoid. It might be the same way as what happens in Washington Square.

I think that's all. I will develop this humble ideas as soon as I progress with the text.

Blogged with the Flock Browser

Aspects of A Modern Instance to Study

So far, I've found several things about A Modern Instance that I can expect to study further.

1. The questions of moral and religion -- I know that so many people have tried to study this aspect of the novel, and I haven't found a specific part of it myself. However, it's a very open space to study.
   
2. A psychoanalytical approach to the female protagonist Marcia Gaylord who seems to have a kind of neurosis that deals with her jealousy. Kermit Vanderbilt says that she looks pretty similar to the woman that Freud analyzed in his book "The Analysis of the Case of Dora".
3. Question about capitalism and the practice of press in the capitalist era -- the way Bartley Hubbard treats his "future" newspaper as he explains it to Mr. Ricker and the way Mr. Witherby runs his newspaper ('from the counting room'). Besides, there's also a matter of branding here. Bartley doesn't use the word 'Tivoli beer', but 'Tivoli' to refer to the beer that he's crazy about.
   
4. Stylistic study on a minor element of the novel, such as, "peer-characterization" by several of the novel characters, especially Mr. Atherton. I think this weakens the novel. It even dictates readers about how to read the characters. Our interpretation is somewhat confined to what Mr. Atherton says. I should say that this has reduced my reverence to the Dean. I know people have taken for granted that Howells is a somewhat infallible author, but to me the way he 'runs' his novel makes it a bit weak.
   

I guess, that's what I have in my mind so far. I'm thinking about doing a study on one of the above-listed points.

Blogged with the Flock Browser

mr. atherton, kayak juru cerita yang menyusup ke dalam cerita

tetep dari a modern instance william dean howells.

ya, saya sekarang mulai bisa memahami jalan pikirannya prof. adams. kayaknya atherton ini memang karakter yang ganjil. kerjanya suka peer-characterization. seolah-olah analisisnya atas karakter tokoh-tokoh di dalam cerita ini tidak bisa dibantah kebenarannya. lihat saja bagaimana dia berdiskusi dengan si ben halleck tentang karakter bartley hubbard, marcia gaylord, dan bagaimana menjelang akhir cerita dan di akhir cerita dia berdiskusi dengan istrinya, si clara, tentang karakter ben halleck.

dan waktu dia menutup cerita. ah!!!! sungguh keterlaluan! dia ini seperti penulis yang masuk ke cerita demi melancarkan cerita... benar mungkin kata prof. adams...

Blogged with the Flock Browser

marcia gaylord, naifnya konsisten

ya, satu hal yang bisa dijadikan semacam penanda bahwa karakterisasi marcia itu sangat kuat adalah ketika dengan naifnya yang konsisten dia menyalah artikan surat dari bartley yang dia terima dua tahun setelah keminggatan si suami!!!

mr. atherton, kata mutiara, peer-characterization

memang sih banyak yang menganggap mr. atherton ini penting tapi misterius, misterius tapi penting. tapi ya, memang layak diselidiki. ben halleck mesti ke tempat dia buat curhat. miss kingsburry butuh dia untuk mengelola keuangannya.

bener kata prof. adams, mungkin dia ini semacam penthungan penjaga keadaan.

satu lagi yang penting, betapa banyaknya kata-kata mutiara yang bisa diambil dari novel ini. saya merasa howells terlalu banyak omong, terlalu banyak cerita, terlalu menggiring pembaca.

terus lagi, para tokoh suka menggambarkan karakterisasi tokoh lain, sehingga ada kesan karakter masing-masing orang terbuka sekali terhadap orang lain. ada apa dengan ini? apakah si dekan memang terlalu banyak omong dan sedikit menunjukkan?

konsep jurnalisme versi bartley hubbard

dari salah satu bab a modern instance, saya menemukan sebuah bagian yang berisikan formulasi pandangan jurnalisme versi bartley hubbard dan mr. ricker.

mr. ricker berpandangan bahwa jurnalisme itu harus berpihak kepada publik, dan sebuah koran memang sebuah milik pribadi (private property) tapi sebuah perusahaan publik (public enterprise). dan satu yang pasti, jangan jual diri kepada iklan!

bartley kurang peduli tentang hubungan dengan iklan. tapi menurut dia sebuah koran kedudukannya harus lebih tinggi daripada publik, terutama jika publik yang dimaksud memiliki standar moral lebih rendah. namun, bartley lebih memandang koran sebagai sarana mencari keuntungan, oleh karenanya dia berusaha menyasar semua segmen publik dengan cara mengawali koran sebagai ajang berita kriminal dan pembunuhan, yang dia anggap sebagai kegemaran dari segmen masyarakat paling rendah. dan ujung-ujungnya nanti adalah kalau sudah berisi apresiasi seni dan sejenisnya. tapi, jangan tinggalkan pembunuhan, karena bagaimanapun ada orang dengan strata ekonomi tinggi tapi suka berita pembunuhan, dan jika tidak ada pembunuhan, maka dia tidak bisa lagi beli koran ini dengan pura-pura menggemari berita tingkat tinggi padahal sebenarnya ingin baca kriminal. hehehe... ini bagian yang sulit diparafrase, hehehe...

Blogged with the Flock Browser

squire gaylord (dan bartley hubbard)

masih tentang a modern instance by william dean howells:

apa ya yang kira-kira ada di balik sikap squire gaylord yang 'nggak melepas topinya selama ngobrol, dan hanya melepasnya waktu duduk di depan maja dan di kasur; dan begitu bangkit dari situ langsung pakai topinya lagi' dan duduk 'nyante sambil tetep pake topi' (keduanya hal. 298)?

harus diselesaikan!