Showing posts with label Ford Madox Ford. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ford Madox Ford. Show all posts

Saturday, April 03, 2010

Some Do Not... discussion: Part One

Picture source

Jumping down from the high step of the dog-cart the girl completely disappeared into the silver: she had on an otter-skin toque, dark, that should have been visible. But she was gone more completely than if she had dropped into deep water, into snow--or through tissue paper. More suddenly, at least! In darkness or in deep water a moving paleness would have been visible for a second: snow or a paper hoop would have left an opening. Here there had been nothing.

The constatation interested him. He had been watching her intently and with concern for fear she should miss the hidden lower step, in which case she would certainly bark her shins. But she had jumped clear of the cart: with unreasonable pluckiness, in spite of his: “Look out how you get down.” He wouldn't have done it himself: he couldn't have faced jumping down into that white solidity...

He would have asked: “Are you all right?” but to express more concern than the “look out,” which he had expended already, would have detracted from his stolidity. He was Yorkshire and stolid: she south country and soft: emotional: given to such ejaculations as 'I hope you're not hurt,' when the Yorkshireman only grunts. But soft because she was south country. She was as good as a man--a south-country man. She was ready to acknowledge the superior woodenness of the north...That was their convention: so he did not call down: 'I hope you're all right,' though he had desired to.

Her voice came, muffled, as if from the back of the top of his head: the ventriloquial effect was startling: “Make a noise from time to time. It's ghostly down here and the lamp's no good at all. It's almost out.”

He returned to his constatations of the concealing effect of water vapour. He enjoyed the thought of the grotesque appearance he must present in that imbecile landscape. On his right an immense, improbably brilliant horn of a moon, sending a trail as if down the sea, straight to his neck: beside the moon a grotesquely huge star: in an extravagant position above them the Plough, the only constellation that he knew; for, though a mathematician, he despised astronomy. It was not theoretical enough for the pure mathematician and not sufficiently practical for daily life. He had of course calculated the movements of abstruse heavenly bodies: but only from given figures: he had never looked for the stars of his calculations...Above his head and all over the sky were other stars; large and weeping with light, or as the dawn increased, so paling that at times, you saw them; then missed them. Then the eye picked them up again.

Opposite the moon was a smirch or two of cloud; pink below, dark purple above; on the more pallid, lower blue of the limpid sky.

But the absurd thing was this mist!...It appeared to spread from his neck, absolutely level, absolutely silver, to infinity on each side of him. At great distances on his right black tree-shapes, in groups--there were four of them--were exactly like coral islands on a silver sea. He couldn't escape the idiotic comparison: there wasn't any other.

Yet it didn't exactly spread from his neck: when he now held his hands, nipple-high, like pallid fish they held black reins which ran downwards into nothingness. If he jerked the rein, the horse threw its head up. Two pricked ears were visible in greyness: the horse being sixteen two and a bit over, the mist might be ten foot high. Thereabouts...He wished the girl would come back and jump out of the cart again. Being ready for it, he would watch her disappearance more scientifically. He couldn't of course ask her to do it again: that was irritating. The phenomenon would have proved--or it might of course disprove--his idea of smoke screens. The Chinese of the Ming dynasty were said to have approached and overwhelmed their enemies under clouds of--of course, not acrid--vapour. He had read that the Patagonians, hidden by smoke, were accustomed to approach so near to birds or beasts as to be able to take them by hand.

(Part One, Chapter 7)

In reading Parade’s End I plan on posting immediately after finishing a section in order to capture what I felt about it at the time I read it. With Ford being Ford, I’m banking on future sections causing reevaluation and reconsideration of what I’ve already read. So what’s the best approach to write about such a sprawling work, one I find engaging (and a little disappointing on some points)? I’m sure my approach will change with each section.

The structure of this first section is relatively straightforward, the action taking place over a 48-hour period in late June in the early 1910s (probably 1911 or 1912). I can see why some people feel the work is difficult to read. Several chapters drop the reader in the middle of the action with no context to help understand what is happening. At times, conversations have to be read several times in order to recognize who is talking to whom. Pages later, when the context is provided, everything falls into place. It can be frustrating at times to read without moorings, but (so far) Ford has provided a frame of reference at some point for the murky passages. What isn’t always clear, though, is Ford’s take on his characters. The question that keeps coming to mind, and probably will for much of the work, centers on how much does Ford support Tietjens’ views versus how far does his presentation travel into irony? Let’s take a look at a few characters introduced in this section.

Christopher Tietjens
As an aristocratic, rational gentleman, Tietjens is a throwback to a prior era. Underlying his chivalric nature, though, beats a Quixotic heart that becomes confused with the contradictions inherent in his code and his life. He will not divorce his wife even though she has given him cause since “[n]o one but a blackguard would ever submit a woman to the ordeal of divorce.” While he plays the gentleman role perfectly in this case, he fails at rational action. He is a man with encyclopedic knowledge but the one fact he doesn’t know, whether his son is his own, unmoors him. I found it interesting to watch other characters respond to Tietjens. Those that dislike him go out of their way to be rude to him or torture him while those that like him will do anything to please. He provokes a decided response from people, good or bad, wherever he goes.

While his intelligence astounds everyone around him, Tietjens can be inconsistent in application or memory. He acknowledges the fallacy in his argument with Valentine about the Pimlico army clothing factory, yet he makes other mistakes as well. When Tietjens and Macmaster are arguing in the first chapter, Tietjens quotes “The Lady of the Lambs” by Alice Meynell but he gets a word wrong:

“It's precisely that,” Tietjens said. He quoted.

“She walks, the lady of my delight,
A shepherdess of sheep;
She is so circumspect and right:
She has her thoughts to keep.”

Except the poem actually reads “She has her soul to keep”, changing the meaning and (assuming Ford did this on purpose) undermining Tietjens’ argument. In short, Tietjens is always right, except when he isn’t. Which seems to mirror his belief system, a few basic principles dominating his actions while the remainder are chosen à la carte depending on what is most important at the moment. To Ford’s credit, he shows Tietjens working through the inconsistencies and uncertainties, which is probably the point—how will a belief system of old work in the present age. Two considerations remain when I look at Tietjens, though. The first question centers on the accuracy of his nostalgia. In other words, is he recreating a world that never existed? The second revolves around another motive, a little more base. Is Tietjens simply masochistic, finding higher ideals a palatable excuse for sacrificing himself?

Vincent Macmaster
We are not participants in Macmaster’s inner world to the same degree as Tietjens’, but what the reader sees is still interesting. The son of a working-class Scot, Macmaster has had to overachieve in over to receive recognition and standing although he received a helping hand from Tietjens and his family. Macmaster hopes his publications, magazine articles and now a book, proves he belongs to the “circumspect class”, the level of people that pilot the nation. Macmaster’s involvement with many women, many of them married, places him in precarious positions. Tietjens constantly has to intervene and save Macmaster from consequences of those affairs. It will be interesting to see the comparison Ford paints between those that accept and those that reject commitment.

Early in the book we are given a clue to one of the central themes. Macmaster has written a book on Rossetti, the 19th century neoclassical artist. While reviewing the proofs of his book, Macmaster reads his own lines:

'Whether we consider him as the imaginer of mysterious, sensuous and exact plastic beauty; as the manipulator of sonorous, rolling and full-mouthed lines; of words as full of colour as were his canvases; or whether we regard him as the deep philosopher, elucidating and drawing his illumination from the arcana of a mystic hardly greater than himself, to Gabriel Charles Dante Rossetti, the subject of this little monograph, must be accorded the name of one who has profoundly influenced the outward aspects, the human contacts, and all those things that go to make up the life of our higher civilization as we live it to-day...

These are precisely the things Tietjens doesn’t like about society, so another conflict between traditional and modern is presented. Ford also combines Macmaster’s conscious reading of his book with his unconscious thoughts on the fame and women the book will bring him, then shifting to Tietjens’ problems with his wife. Ford’s interweaving of the conscious and unconscious, and the conflict it creates, flows throughout this section.

Sylvia Tietjens
Sylvia has a limited physical appearance in this section but she can be felt throughout it, especially through her husband. She lives to torture him and it seems she has done so their entire relationship. In pondering what she will do, she declares if she stays with him she will be bored beyond belief except for one thing—she can torment him. Even worse, she is willing to corrupt their child to get to her husband. She feels powerless at times even when causing significant damage to those around her. Although running off with another man for several months seems to undercut how powerless she really is. It is almost if she knows that asking to be taken back by her husband will compound the damage she has already done.

Sometimes I wonder if Ford isn’t too heavy on the symbolism. Sylvia offers tea and cream to Father Consett after midnight on Saturday, which means he cannot take mass as he had planned. Even though it was an accident, Sylvia causes difficulties and problems even in innocent actions.


Valentine Wannop
I would love to see a young Judi Dench as Valentine, the perfect complement for Tietjens (unfortunately there does not seem to be a copy of it). As a high-spirited suffragette, she presents one possible model for a “new woman”. Tietjens consciously tries to keep his distance from Valentine even though he desires her. For someone uneducated, at least in the mold of Tietjens and Macmaster, she has learned enough to hold her own (and then some) with them. As someone unattached, she stands out as an exception to the other characters who are viewed in comparison or contrast to their spouses. Ford shows a wonderfully rounded picture of Valentine in a brief period. She protests for suffrage but upsetting the social order does not seem to be one of her goals. She has no problem asking for or accepting Tietjens’ assistance many times.


I’ll end with a few stray comments out of many that stood out in this section. In the first chapter, Tietjens and Macmaster make a few comments about the possibility of war. Macmaster thinks war impossible because the “circumspect classes” “will pilot the nation through the tight places.” Tietjens believes “war is as inevitable as divorce”, drawing a parallel between adultery and war. He does recognize that war blurs social lines, responding to Macmaster’s disdain for educated lower classes with “All the same, when the war comes it will be these little snobs who will save England, because they've the courage to know what they want and to say so.”

Parade’s End is very much a political novel, as the reader sees from the opening comments. Since the novel is early at this point I won’t go into this angle yet, wanting to get a better feel for the direction Ford will go. On to reading Part Two…

…Miss Wannop moved off down the path: it was only suited for Indian file, and had on the left hand a ten-foot, untrimmed quicken hedge, the hawthorn blossoms just beginning to blacken at the edges and small green haws to show. On the right the grass was above knee high and bowed to those that passed. The sun was exactly vertical; the chaffinches said “Pink! Pink!”; the young woman had an agreeable back.

This, Tietjens thought, is England! A man and a maid walk through Kentish grass-fields: the grass ripe for the scythe. The man honourable, clean, upright; the maid virtuous, clean, vigorous: he of good birth; she of birth quite as good; each filled with a too good breakfast that each could yet capably digest. Each come just from an admirably appointed establishment: a table surrounded by the best people: their promenade sanctioned, as it were by the Church--two clergy--the State: two Government officials; by mothers, friends, old maids...Each knew the names of birds that piped and grasses that bowed: chaffinch, greenfinch, yellow-ammer (not, my dear, hammer! amonrer from the Middle High German for “finch”), garden warbler, Dartford warbler, pied-wagtail, known as “dishwasher.” (These charming local dialect names.) Marguerites over the grass, stretching in an infinite white blaze: grasses purple in a haze to the far distant hedgerow: coltsfoot, wild white clover, sainfoin, Italian rye grass (all technical names that the best people must know: the best grass mixture for permanent pasture on the Wealden loam). In the hedge: our lady's bedstraw: dead-nettle: bachelor's button (but in Sussex they call it ragged robin, my dear): so interesting! Cowslip (paigle, you know from the old French pasque, meaning Easter); burr, burdock (farmer that thy wife may thrive, but not burr and burdock wive!); violet leaves, the flowers of course over; black bryony; wild clematis, later it's old man's beard; purple loose-strife. (That our young maid's long purples call and literal shepherds give a grosser name. So racy of the soil!)...Walk, then, through the field, gallant youth and fair maid, minds cluttered up with all these useless anodynes for thought, quotation, imbecile epithets! Dead silent: unable to talk: from too good breakfast to probably extremely bad lunch. The young woman, so the young man is duly warned, to prepare it: pink india-rubber, half-cooked cold beef, no doubt: tepid potatoes, water in the bottom of willow-pattern dish. (No! Not genuine willow-pattern, of course, Mr Tietjens.) Overgrown lettuce with wood-vinegar to make the mouth scream with pain; pickles, also preserved in wood-vinegar; two bottles of public-house beer that, on opening, squirts to the wall. A glass of invalid port...for the gentleman!...and the jaws hardly able to open after the too enormous breakfast at 10.15. Midday now!

“God's England!” Tietjens exclaimed to himself in high good humour. “Land of Hope and Glory!--F natural descending to tonic C major: chord of 6-4, suspension over dominant seventh to common chord of C major...All absolutely correct! Double basses, cellos, all violins: all wood wind: all brass. Full grand organ: all stops: special vox humana and key-bugle effect...Across the counties came the sound of bugles that his father knew...Pipe exactly right. It must be: pipe of Englishman of good birth: ditto tobacco. Attractive young woman's back. English midday mid-summer. Best climate in the world! No day on which man may not go abroad!” Tietjens paused and aimed with his hazel stick an immense blow at a tall spike of yellow mullein with its undecided, furry, glaucous leaves and its undecided, buttony, unripe lemon-coloured flowers. The structure collapsed, gracefully, like a woman killed among crinolines!

“Now I'm a bloody murderer!” Tietjens said. “Not gory! Green-stained with vital fluid of innocent plant...And by God! Not a woman in the country who won't let you rape her after an hour's acquaintance!” He slew two more mulleins and a sow-thistle! A shadow, but not from the sun, a gloom, lay across the sixty acres of purple grass bloom and marguerites, white: like petticoats of lace over the grass!

“By God,” he said, “Church! State! Army! H.M. Ministry: H.M. Opposition: H.M. City Man...All the governing class! All rotten! Thank God we've got a navy!...But perhaps that's rotten too! Who knows! Britannia needs no bulwarks...Then thank God for the upright young man and the virtuous maiden in the summer fields: he Tory of the Tories as he should be: she suffragette of the militants: militant here on earth...as she should be! As she should be! In the early decades of the twentieth century however else can a woman keep clean and wholesome! Ranting from platforms, splendid for the lungs: bashing in policemen's helmets...No! It's I do that: my part, I think, miss!...Carrying heavy banners in twenty-mile processions through streets of Sodom. All splendid! I bet she's virtuous. But you can tell it in the eye. Nice eyes! Attractive back. Virginal cockiness...Yes, better occupation for mothers or empire than attending on lewd husbands year in year out till you're as hysterical as a female cat on heat...You could see it in her: that woman: you can see it in most of 'em! Thank God then for the Tory, upright young married man and the suffragette kid...Backbone of England!...”

He killed another flower.

(Part One, Chapter 6)

Sunday, March 28, 2010

Parade's End online resources (Updated)

Some Do Not
Illustration by Stella Bowen
Picture source

Note: check back for updates

I will probably stay close to my usual pattern of posting during the read-along for Parade's End. With "online resources," I try to find sites or pages that are useful in understanding a work. If anyone would like to add a resource to these lists, feel free to email me or leave a comment.


Ford Madox Ford

Wikipedia entry

The Ford Madox Ford Society page

The International Ford Madox Ford Studies series

Ford’s Training, an article by Sara Haslam at The Open University

Julian Barnes' essay for The Guardian: The Saddest Story

Ford Madox Ford's personal life was deeply complicated, made worse by his own indecision and economy with the truth. No wonder unreliability, shifting identities and the turmoils of love and sex are the hallmarks of his greatest novel. Julian Barnes admires The Good Soldier.

A review in The New York Times on a couple of books covering Ford and his work

Update: Autobiography, biography and Ford Madox Ford's women by Ros Pesemen at the Women's History Review looks at the appearance of Ford's partners in his work. After the Affair explores the post-breakup works of Ford and Jean Rhys (Thanks to Mel U for the links)


Parade’s End

If your country’s copyright laws are similar to Australia’s, the first three books can be found at Project Gutenberg Australia

The Penguin Classics edition has an introduction by Robie Macauley. Two-thirds of his essay can be read at Questia

A summary of the series can be found at jrank.org

A review of No More Parades in the March 20, 1926 edition of The Literary Review. The article includes a picture of Ford, James Joyce, and Ezra Pound.

While I’m on old articles, there is a short review of A Man Could Stand Up in the May 27, 1927 edition of State College News of the New York State College for Teachers (see the middle column, page 2).


World War I literature

The Wisconsin Library Association website provides a select list of WWI Fiction and Memoirs

In addition to the WLA list, here are a few additional books on World War I and the literature it generated:
George Walter, ed., The Penguin Book of First World War Poetry
Paul Fussell, The Great War and Modern Memory
Trudi Tate, Modernism, History and the First World War
Bernard Bergonzi, Heroes' Twilight: A Study of Literature of the Great War
John Brophy, The Long Trail: Soldiers' Songs and Slang, 1914 – 1918
Dorothy Goldman, Jane Gledhill, and Judith Hattaway, Women Writers and the Great War
Guy Chapman, Vain Glory: a Miscellany of the Great War 1914-1938
Allyson Booth, Postcards from the Trenches: Negotiating the Space between Modernism and the First World War

Update: The WLA site mentions Edmund Blunden's Undertones of War. In the past week, Stephen Pentz (at his blog First Known When Lost) has a couple of posts on Blunden's memoir. The first post provides an overview of the book and his method as well as a couple of memories. The second post covers one of the sad, humorous features of the war (and the name of one of his poems)--"Trench Nomenclature". Also check out Stephen's comment with additional recommendations and information.

I have added some links to color photographs from World War I.

Monday, March 08, 2010

Parade's End

Mel u at The Reading Life and I will be reading Parade's End by Ford Madox Ford starting in April. I've had the Carcanet Press version sitting next to the bed for over a year and I can't take the procrastination any more.

Feel free to comment as we tackle the four books. If you post about any of the books, be sure to let us know--we'll be happy to link to it (or if you already have a post, I'll be happy to include that as well). I'll include a quote from the Carcanet Press website (although please choose any version of the book you like):
Of the various demands one can make of the novelist, that he show us the way in which a society works, that he show an understanding of the human heart, that he create characters whose reality we believe and for whose fate we care, that he describe things and people so that we feel their physical presence, that he illuminate our moral consciousness, that he make us laugh and cry, that he delight us by his craftsmanship, there is not one, it seems to me, that Ford does not completely satisfy. There are not many English novels which deserve to be called great: Parade's End is one of them.

W.H.Auden, 1961


Parade's End is the title Ford Madox Ford gave to his greatest work, the four Tietjens novels which -- in Graham Greene's words -- tell `the terrifying story of a good man tortured, pursued, driven into revolt, and ruined as far as the world is concerned by the clever devices of a jealous and lying wife'. He wanted to see the book printed in one volume: Some Do Not (1924), No More Parades (1925) and A Man Could Stand Up (1926), with his afterthought, The Last Post (1928).

Christopher Tietjens is the last of a breed, the Tory gentleman, which the Great War, a savage marriage to Sylvia, and the qualities inherent in his nature, define and unravel. Here the War's attritions offered no escape from domestic witchcraft. Opposite Tietjens is Macmaster, a Scot, different in class and culture, at once friend and foil. Here Ford's art and his human vision achieve their greatest complexity and subtlety.

Wednesday, December 12, 2007

The Good Soldier summary

The text for The Good Soldier can be found at Project Gutenberg or at Eldretch Press.

I have rounded up a few online resources on Ford Madox Ford.

Since The Good Soldier doesn’t really lend itself to posts on the sections as you read through them, I approached writing about the book with the following topics:

The Good Soldier: A chronology
The Good Soldier: Character list and relationships
The Good Soldier: Method of narration and Dowell’s blindness
The Good Soldier: More self-deception and pathologies
The Good Soldier: Other themes and motifs

The Good Soldier
(1981 TV movie)

The Good Soldier (1981 TV movie)

The credits for The Good Soldier, produced by Granada Television, can be found at IMDB. I remember seeing this when it originally aired on Masterpiece Theatre and enjoying it immensely. I didn’t realize it would be 25 years later before I read the book.

The movie runs very true to the book despite the difficult circular nature of the novel’s narration. Using flashbacks and revisiting scenes with more detail added, the movie is able to capture some of the accretive nature in which facts are revealed instead of going strictly in chronological order. Susan Fleetwood does a wonderful job as Leonora, and it was hard for me to keep a straight face when John Ratzenberger showed up as Jimmy (he did a fine job, but I associate him with too many other roles now). The sets and locations are lovely and give you the feel of an era that is long gone.

I highly recommend the movie. That being said, it does feels stilted and tedious at times. If you’re not a fan of other Masterpiece Theatre shows, you many not like this at it has the same period-piece feel and languid pace of other productions. One of the biggest disappointments for me with the adaptation was that it did not feel like they developed the friendship between Dowell and Edward. In the book it is clear that Dowell still loves Edward in spite of everything he now knows. Yet you never see much of a friendship between the two, although I realize that class constraints would dictate the two men act as they do in the movie (it is interesting to compare the men’s staid behavior with the women’s animated actions). Maybe the warmth is all in Dowell’s head and they capture that accurately, although I believe it was just difficult to show the friendship develop beyond playing pool or hunting together.

Again, it’s a relatively minor quibble with a well done production. It is available now on DVD.

Tuesday, December 11, 2007

The Good Soldier: Other themes and motifs

One theme in Ford’s book is the inadequacy or irrelevance of social and religious institutions in the modern (at that time) world. That there is a moral and social shortfall is hammered home by his use of August 4th (the day Britain declared war on Germany in World War I) for all important dates in the novel. That technique feels more than a little strained. In addition, the characters are so damaged that it is difficult to tell how much of the gap between the institutional ideal and their sad reality could ever be bridged.

I highlighted the religious affiliation of the characters in the descriptions because of the poor showing religion has in the novel. I’m not sure that priests would ever advise a wife to take her husband to Monte Carlo for “a touch of irresponsibility” but in everything else which sounds realistic they did a poor job (despite Dowell thinking “it was a good idea, but it worked out wrongly”). Religion, to some extent, was one of the major sticking points between Edward and Leonora, whether in Edward’s misguided attempt to build a chapel at Branshaw or their inability to agree on what religion their children should be. For a couple that didn’t usually allow religious tenets to influence their actions, the fact that religious differences could drive such a wedge between them adds one more irony to the work. Leonora cuts herself off from the church (in order to avoid confession) at precisely the moment it should have helped her most. Whether irrelevant as an institution or the source of contention, the inability of religion to provide any guidance in the novel definitely stands out.

Marriage, whether viewed as a religious or social institution comes in for a drubbing as well, although once again I think the problems reside more with the characters than with the institution. Maybe that is Ford’s point—when something is so widely ignored or irrelevant it is no longer useful. However Dowell raises one of his many false dichotomies in his regard to marriage and society:
Mind, I am not preaching anything contrary to accepted morality. I am not advocating free love in this or any other case. Society must go on, I suppose, and society can only exist if the normal, if the virtuous, and the slightly deceitful flourish, and if the passionate, the headstrong, and the too-truthful are condemned to suicide and to madness.

Those are not the only two options, but he is unable to see other choices. One additional institution that receives a drubbing is class and the gap these characters display between their behavior and their social standing. Edward tried to represent the kindly landlord but, because of his other failings, Leonora strips him of that standing. Dowell evidently feels class is extremely important since he mentions genealogy almost immediately. Despite being part of the moneyed class and staying at expensive spas, he is still taken advantage of by others of the same class. Not to mention being cuckolded by a baggage handler.

The love/hate feelings within the marriages are interesting to watch, with Edward and Leonora continually rebalancing respect and hate for each other. Leonora’s outward kindness masks the impact of her actions. The difference between Dowell and Florence are fairly static during their marriage—John loves her in his way and Florence treats him like dirt behind his back—but John rebalances things as he works on telling the story. The question Dowell has to work through is presented early: “If for nine years I have possessed a goodly apple that is rotten at the core and discover its rottenness only in nine years and six months less four days, isn't it true to say that for nine years I possessed a goodly apple?” Lastly on all the institutions, for all the virtue and bravery Edward shows as “the good soldier,” it all ultimately rang hollow for him. None of those characteristics seem to carry over into his personal life to any benefit for him.

There are many more themes, motifs and symbols in the novel, but I think I’ve addressed more than enough and would like to move on. I did like the way most symbols or motifs ("heart" or Edward's baggage, for example) were easily worked into the story. One additional thing I wanted to mention before moving on is the total passivity of Dowell. It is hard to imagine someone that passive, that oblivious to what is going on around him. Yet his voice is so guileless, frank in its limitations that you initially trust him...want to hear his story. He is clearly airing his weaknesses in order to excuse himself as part of his attempt to justify his actions (or lack thereof). He draws you in, attempting to deceive you just like he has been tricking himself all along. The consistency in voice and action helps give his passivity credibility.

Next: the 1981 TV movie.

The Good Soldier: More self-deception and pathologies

I covered quite a bit on Dowell’s self-deception and moral blindness. The inability to face the truth or make any sense of events is his personal failing. That Dowell elevates his personal failures to not being able to understand the world or judge another’s character does not mean Ford agrees with him. I think Ford would conclude just the opposite based on the self-deceptions and pathologies he assigns to the other characters.

Florence mistakenly aggrandizes her knowledge to a level of cultural authority. I’ve mentioned earlier that Dowell contradicts or undercuts much of her tourguide performances (a trait he carries over to Florence in general), which makes much of her pronouncements both humorous and pathetic. But the cultural assumption is just one part of Florence wanting to exert control. The ironic part of Florence’s schemes to control Dowell is that they backfire—she painted herself in a corner with her “attack” at sea and now can not leave the continent. She can not obtain her wish of English gentry (and possibly even reclaiming her ancestral property from the Ashburnhams) because of her lies. Even more ironic is John buying the property at the end of the book. Dowell’s attitude toward Florence vacillates, with “poor dear Florence” being wished a tormented stay in hell the next moment.

The loss of control, first over Leonora (who, as Dowell puts it, treats Florence "like the whore she was”), then Edward (hearing him pledge his love to Nancy), and finally her cuckolded husband (who found out courtesy of Mr. Bagshawe) is what drove her to suicide.

Leonora is an interesting case, full of contradictions. The priests she has as spiritual advisers lead her to elevate Edward’s failings at fidelity to a universal truth that all men are animals. She essentially tells Edward to go ahead and have his affairs since she knows he can’t help it. She participates in choosing the paramour at times in order to maintain some control and proper appearance. If this weren’t enough to demean Edward, she takes over the finances from him which seems to totally emasculate her husband. Yet she can show kindness, forgiving her husband his dalliances or correctly deciding that Dowell can not handle the truth of his wife’s affair. This kindness can be horribly misguided, as shown by her cruelty in insisting Edward take Nancy’s innocence in order to get the girl out of his mind. Since he does not comply, she destroys Nancy’s worshipful outlook of Edward. While Leonora occasionally blames herself for differences with Edward, she never seriously considers that she has any role in Edward’s errant behavior.

Edward plays the role of the benevolent squire, viewing himself as their protector. He shows a similar chivalric outlook with most of his female conquests, first as a father figure in the Kilsyte case all the way through his tortured denial in protecting Nancy’s virginity. Edward also sabotages his chivalric notions by his self-centeredness. The best quote that highlights just how self-centered he is "He had not any idea that Florence could have committed suicide without writing at least a tirade to him. The absence of that made him certain that it had been heart disease."

One delicious irony is Dowell constantly second guessing Leonora’s actions, even after he knows everything was a sham. “Leonora should have abandoned him so precipitately when she only thought that he had gone yachting with the Clinton Morleys.” And an even more extended condemnation from Dowell:

I don't mean to say that she was doing a wrong thing. She was certainly doing right in trying to warn me that Florence was making eyes at her husband. But, if she did the right thing, she was doing it in the wrong way. Perhaps she should have reflected longer; she should have spoken, if she wanted to speak, only after reflection. Or it would have been better if she had acted--if, for instance, she had so chaperoned Florence that private communication between her and Edward became impossible. She should have gone eavesdropping; she should have watched outside bedroom doors. It is odious; but that is the way the job is done. She should have taken Edward away the moment Maisie was dead. No, she acted wrongly.

For some reason I don’t see Dowell as the best judge of what Leonora should have done. Just as Dowell's comments about Florence vacillate from love to hate, so too does his comments about the Ashburnhams. Florence receives the worst while he is generally kind toward Leonora (even though he is estranged from her at the end). Yet it is Edward that remains lovingly in Dowell’s heart. There is rarely a harsh word said about Edward, and even when doing so Dowell usually follows up with an excuse or qualifier.

Every one of the participants is badly damaged, unable to differentiate between individual failings and a universal standard. The actors betray no anchor—whether moral, spiritual, or civic—to ground or measure their actions. Ford is so consistent on this point with all of the characters that I do not believe that Dowell’s judgments speak for the author.

Next: other themes and motifs, as well as the 1981 TV movie.

Monday, December 10, 2007

The Good Soldier: Method of narration and Dowell’s blindness

“I have, I am aware, told this story in a very rambling way so that it may be difficult for anyone to find their path through what may be a sort of maze. I cannot help it.” This quote, from the start of Part IV, sums up the method quite well. John Dowell has undertaken to tell “the saddest story” as if sitting beside the fireplace with a friend. The method is reminiscent of Conrad’s Marlow, but other than being very heavy on impressions the similarity ends there. Dowell’s narration is full of confessions of doubt, ignorance, and helplessness. He implies he is writing this story to clarify events, but it quickly becomes apparent he is trying to rationalize and justify his blindness.

I mentioned in the chronology post that assembling such a timeline takes away from the effect of the narration, but such a task is necessary to reconstruct what actually happened and to compare that reconstruction to Dowell’s account of events. Without doing this, the irony of the story would be lost. Dowell is constantly asking the reader questions, many of which are rhetorical or give false choices. The facts are revealed piecemeal and at times seemingly without Dowell even realizing it.

Dowell begins by telling the story from his point of view, but occasionally adds facts gleaned from Edward or Leonora in his talks with them after Florence’s death. It is interesting that Florence is the one person from the two couples who does not have a voice in the book. In addition to gradually adding other voices to the story, Dowell comes to grips with the facts as he is conveying them. His attitude toward the subjects vacillates, sometimes from sentence to sentence, contradicting how he feels about something.

Dowell shows us a dual impressionism: he describes his impression of events as they happened in addition to his current feelings toward those events (as he processes them while writing, for maybe the first time). That he has to wait eighteen months before he can accurately describe the final days of Edward’s life is telling. Facts about Edward’s suicide are revealed almost as an appendix, casually tossed off at the end. Even with all the time and facts at his disposal, Dowell still has trouble revealing the truth to others and to himself. Or maybe he just wishes to continue his self-deception. Dowell states several times that things are “a darkness” to him still. And when he views Nancy in her current state, his description of her beauty could double for his time with Florence and the Ashburnhams: “And to think that it all means nothing—that it is a picture without a meaning.”

Things are gradually revealed in the story so that when Dowell describes an incident for a second or third time there is additional knowledge as to what is truly happening. For example, the visit to the castle at M---- is fleshed out with the additional knowledge of Edward’s and Leonora’s history to that point and Leonora’s despair takes on an added depth you can’t realize upon the first telling. The willful blindness of Dowell on the events as the originally happened is highlighted in this re-telling. He takes his own inability to see things as they truly are and falsely elevates it to an inability for any of us to know. His description of his maid is just one example of conflating the specific with the universal:

That, for instance, was the way with Florence’s maid in Paris. We used to trust that girl with blank cheques for the payment of the tradesmen. For quite a time she was so trusted by us. Then, suddenly, she stole a ring. We should no have believed her capable of it; she would not have believed herself capable of it. It was nothing in her character.

Yet Dowell has already explained how the maid stole the ring in order to save her boyfriend from going to prison. Dowell sabotages his own attempt at using this specific example as a universal law that you can’t judge someone’s character. His tentative putting forth of facts and inability to derive any lessons to be learned is his pathological response to handling this story. One last example:

I don’t know. And there is nothing to guide us. And if everything is so nebulous about a matter so elementary as the morals of sex, what is there to guide us in the more subtle morality of all other personal contacts, associations, and activities? Or are we meant to act on impulse alone? It is all a darkness.

This illustrates his inability to face up to what his life with Florence and the Ashburnhams truly was for the entire time of his relationship with each. To do so…to face up to the fact that the relationship with his wife has been a lie and his friends are cuckolding Dowell…undermines everything he has ever done with them. In Dowell’s narration he comes close to realizing and/or expressing the truth in several instances, but continually backs away from it. During the visit to the castle of M---- Dowell “was aware of something treacherous, something frightful, something evil in the day” but gladly accepts Leonora’s lie about being offended because of Florence’s comments about the Irish and the Catholics.

Dowell repeats this time and again, presenting a willful blindness in order to maintain a happy façade of meaning. As the façade crumbles, he repeatedly asks how he could have known so he can maintain at least a modicum of respect. One irony is the pride that Dowell takes in nursing Florence and being attentive to her needs—avoiding stressful subjects, respecting her locked bedroom door, etc. To be so attentive regarding a false state of affairs (which only assists her in carrying on affairs under his nose) would be quite a truth to face. And Dowell proves over and over that he can not. It is as if "You can't handle the truth" was tailor-made for him.

In the reviews I have read of the book, many of the criticisms believe such a method of narration is either unnecessary or Ford saying “look what I can do.” (I’m paraphrasing) However, I believe the method is critical to the book, providing a parallel narrative to the traditional storyline. Yes, you have to work more in piecing the two narratives together, irony is not always apparent on the first pass, and you realize the narrator can not be trusted. Yet I get the feeling that if John Dowell were to tell me the story, it would be exactly in this manner. I would have to question everything he told me and revisit previous things he said in order to gauge if it fits in or not. For such a story, the manner is consistent with the world that Ford has created.

Next topic: other pathologies and self-deceptions

Friday, December 07, 2007

The Good Soldier: Character list and relationships

John Dowell
A Quaker from Philadelphia, John Dowell is the direct narrator of the story. His family came from England with William Penn, settling in Pennsylvania. He controls property in Philadelphia and is able to maintain a wealthy lifestyle. John prides himself on being attentive and nursing.

Florence (Hurlbird) Dowell
Florence is a Protestant who lives with two aunts (who try to discourage John from marrying her) in Stamford, Connecticut. She graduated from Vasser and loves to appear as an authority on culture. She tells John what she is looking for in a husband:
She wanted to marry a gentleman of leisure; she wanted a European establishment. She wanted her husband to have an English accent, an income of fifty thousand dollars a year from real estate and no ambitions to increase that income. And—she faintly hinted--she did not want much physical passion in the affair.

Edward Ashburnham
The “good soldier” of the book title. Captain in the British army (Fourteenth Hussars) who views himself as a genteel landlord, interested in his tenants long-term well-being. Wins many medals and demonstrates acts of bravery in his army career. At first appearance, a model Victorian/Edwardian man.

Leonora (Powys) Ashburnham
An Irish Catholic who has taken to heart her father’s careful management of money. Her father (a Colonel) was friends with Edward’s father (also a Colonel) and arranged for Edward to marry one of his seven girls. Leonora shows a talent for kindness and cruelty, usually simultaneously.

Nancy Rufford
Becomes a ward of Edward and Leonora when her mother abandons her and her father goes to India. She calls the Ashburnhams aunt and uncle and views them as having the perfect marriage. Educated in a convent school, she displays a naïveté of the world that proves dangerous to her and to the Ashburnhams.

Maisie Maidan
An Irish Catholic, having attended the same convent school as Leonora. Around 23, her husband was in the army with Edward. The Ashburnhams bring her from Burma to Nauheim with them for treatment of her weak heart. She is described by John Dowell as gentle and submissive.

Jimmy
A cabin boy that travels with Uncle John and Florence on their round-the-world-trip. Florence has an affair with him that is noticed by others. She continues her affair with him after her marriage until Edward drives him away.

While that isn’t a complete listing, I think it covers the significant players in the book. I’ll look at some of the relationships in the next section.

The Dowells
John agrees to marry Florence in spite of her requirements (listed above). And when John comes to elope with Florence, she keeps him waiting two hours at the foot of the ladder (planning her course of action to carry on her affair with Jimmy). Shortly after leaving the United States on their trip to Europe, she fakes heart problems. Once in Europe, doctors tell John that he “had better refrain from manifestations of affection” to protect her heart. John’s response? “I was ready enough.”

Since doctors recommend that the Dowells remain in Europe (on the continent), Florence is frustrated in her plan to settle in an English estate. The Dowells travel from health spa to health spa while maintaining a place in Paris. It is at Nauheim (a resort near Frankfurt) that they meet the Ashburnhams.

John is mistaken in almost everything about Florence. A couple of examples: He deduces that the aunts didn’t want him to marry her because of her weak heart when in reality they are trying to save him from her wayward behavior. He first states “I believe that for the twelve years her life lasted, after the storm that seemed irretrievably to have weakened her heart--I don't believe that for one minute she was out of my sight, except when she was safely tucked up in bed and I should be downstairs…” when upon reflection he opines “When I come to think of it she was out of my sight most of the time.” One interesting characteristic is to watch John quietly dispute or undercut Florence’s comments.

The Ashburnhams
The Ashburnhams’ marriage is tested early on with the Kilsyte case, in which Edward kisses a crying servant girl. Leonora rallies behind Edward, which is what he needs at the time. A few years later, Edward began a series of affairs where his passions took a physical, mental and sometimes financial toll on him. After the La Dolciquita affair cost him a huge sum, Leonora insists he transfer to India and she takes control of the couple’s finances. By economizing and extracting more money from the management of Branshaw, she improves their lot but at the cost of emasculating Edward.

In Edward’s series of affairs, he carries over his chivalric sense of protection from his estate to the women he believes he loves. Leonora not only forgives him his wayward forays but also helps him acquire new conquests. She is relieved when the objects of affection are well-to-do since she knows there won’t be a scandal—she values the appearance of a perfect marriage more than having one. When they accompany Maisie to Nauheim, Leonora believes things are actually improving with Edward even though they no longer speak in private.

The Ashburnhams to some extent remind me of Tom and Daisy Buchanan from The Great Gatsby: “They smashed up things and creatures and then retreated back into their money or their vast carelessness, or whatever it was that kept them together, and let other people clean up the mess they had made.” In addition to harming those around them, the Ashburnhams also inflict massive damage to themselves.

The “minuet”
John Dowell initially describes the time with the Ashburnhams as a beautiful minuet in which each participant is in tune with the others’ actions. He corrects himself immediately by saying it was really a prison of screaming hysterics, which highlights his coming to terms with the true history between the couples. The couples’ trip to the castle at M---- is a pivotal point in the novel, described several times from different vantage points or with different knowledge provided each time. Florence takes the lead, happy to show how knowledgeable she is (even as John silently disputes much of what she says), and clearly shows her designs on Edward. Leonora’s happiness over the improvement with Edward has already been dashed by discovering Major Basil’s blackmail, and Florence’s designs (and the look in Edward’s eyes) push her to the edge of despair. John refuses to see what is going on, however, and Leonora generously decides to spare him the details.

As time goes on there is no longer any pretending between Florence and Leonora. It becomes clear that Florence is more interested in the control the affair gives her than the sex. Leonora’s behavior toward Florence in private becomes contemptuous: “"You come to me straight out of his bed to tell me that that is my proper place. I know it, thank you." Once Leonora tells Florence “You want to tell me that you are Edward's mistress. You can be. I have no use for him," the control Florence once had is broken. Florence’s despair in thinking she was being replaced by Nancy is enough to send things crashing down around her. But when she sees Mr. Bagshawe and suspects he has told her husband about the affair with Jimmy, she realizes she has lost control over John as well.

Once Leonora recovers from her breakdown, she takes her cruelty out on Edward and Nancy. In trying to drive Nancy into Edward’s bed, Leonora strips Nancy of her innocence (and eventually her mind). In addition, Edward is stripped of his manhood and ultimately his life while trying to behave properly.

Next topic: the method of narration

Tuesday, December 04, 2007

The Good Soldier: A chronology

The Good Soldier does not lend itself very well to discussion by chapters or parts, I’ll approach it in a different manner. I will start with a chronology, discuss the main characters, cover themes and motifs, review the 1981 TV movie version, and throw in anything else that makes sense in covering this challenging book.

Since John Dowell, the narrator of The Good Soldier skips around on the story, I thought it might be helpful to have a timeline of events. Please add a note if there are any errors. I hesitate to attempt this since it defeats the purpose of Dowell's narration--assembling a storyline separate from the telling of the story takes away from the effect. But at the risk of detracting from the novel, here’s a pass at the chronology:

CHRONOLOGY

1868: John Dowell born
1870/71: Edward Ashburnham born
1873: Leonora Powys born
August 4, 1874: Florence Hurlbird born
1892: Nancy Rufford born

1892: Edward and Leonora married

1897: La Dolciquita affair; Ashburnham’s move to India

1898: Mrs. Basil affair begins

August 4, 1899: Florence sets out on round-the-world trip with uncle and Jimmy

August 4, 1900: Florence starts affair with Jimmy

August 4, 1901: Florence and John Dowell marry, sail to Europe

1903: Maisie Maidan appears on the scene

July 1904: The Dowells meet the Ashburnhams at Hotel Excelsior in Nauheim
Note: At one point Ford says they met in August, but elsewhere said they had dined together for about a month before the next event happens. One other mention has Florence and Edward’s affair starting in 1903.

August 4, 1904: Trip to castle at M---; Maisie’s death

1904 and 1905: Edward visits the Dowells in Paris several times

1910: Leonora attempts to have an affair with Rodney Bayham but fails

July 30, 1913: John Hurlbird (Florence’s uncle) dies at age 84

August 4, 1913: Florence commits suicide

August 1913: Dowell goes to Waterbury to settle Florence’s uncle’s estate and Philadelphia for business (first visit to U.S. since 1901)

September 1, 1913: the Ashburnhams return to Branshaw

October 6, 1913: Edward Ashburnham gives a horse to Selmes

October 20, 1913: Nancy Rufford reads of the Brands’ divorce

Between Oct 20 and Nov 12: Edward announces he has written to Colonel Rufford that Nancy should go visit him

November 12, 1913: Leonora goes to Nancy’s bedroom to say Edward was in love with her; Nancy announces her intention to go to Glasgow (after receiving letter from her mother); Edward insists Nancy will go to India

November 13, 1913: Edward White telegraphs saying he will take Nancy’s mother to Italy

Nov/Dec 1913: Nancy comes to Edward’s bed, but Edward rebuffs her

Nov/Dec 1913: Dowell goes to Branshaw

December 1913: Edward’s suicide

Dec 1913/Jan 1914: Nancy, in Aden, sees of Edward’s suicide and loses her mind

January 1914: 10 days after Edward’s death Leonora tells of Florence’s suicide and unfaithfulness to Dowell

February 1914: Dowell begins writing the story; finishes most of it by August 1914

End of 1914: Dowell goes to Ceylon to bring Nancy back to Branshaw

Uncertain: Leonora marries Rodney Bayham

End of 1916: Dowell finishes the book


There are several contradictions and errors in Dowell’s story, likely errors by Ford but quite in character with Dowell’s uncertainty in telling the story. Ford’s insistence on pegging so many monumental events to August 4th (Germany invaded Belgium and thus Britain declared war on Germany on August 4, 1914) caused a few things to move out of alignment.

Events from November 1913 onward are a little looser—events happen that don’t always line up or agree with the season. Many events have specific dates, but other events that are supposed to happen in between these dates may throw the alignment out of order. One of the more humorous errors has Dowell finishing the book in 1916 when Ford has it published in 1915.

Thursday, November 29, 2007

Ford Madox Ford online resources



Some online resources for Ford Madox Ford:

Wikipedia entry

The Good Soldier at
Project Gutenberg, or at
Eldretch Press

The Ford Madox Ford Society

International Ford Madox Ford Studies, published by the Ford Madox Ford Society

Agreg-ink's site appears to have many useful links for online texts, bibliographies and other resources

Julian Barnes' essay for The Guardian: The Saddest Story
Ford Madox Ford's personal life was deeply complicated, made worse by his own indecision and economy with the truth. No wonder unreliability, shifting identities and the turmoils of love and sex are the hallmarks of his greatest novel. Julian Barnes admires The Good Soldier.