The Professor by Charlotte Brontë

Charlotte Brontë wrote The Professor before she wrote Jane Eyre, but it was published posthumously. I found the plot interesting and the characters enjoyable, while the entire work was much less intense and serious than Jane Eyre. After Wuthering Heights and Jane Eyre, The Professor revealed a lighter side to the Brontë sisters. Although there were serious and occasionally tragic events, the ending allows the protagonists to find permanent happiness.

Persuasion by Jane Austen

The fourth Austen novel I've read this year, Persuasion follows Pride and Prejudice, Sense and Sensibility, and Emma. Persuasion was Austen's last novel, and her only one featuring a heroine who is far past her youth.  The novel has great merit as a love story with social commentary, and while Austen's comedic sense is at times apparent,  the overall effect is not as humorous as that of Pride and Prejudice or Sense and Sensibility.

Although I've heard critiques of Austen on the basis that she is a product of her time, the complaint is both obvious and disingenuous. Austen could no more write from the viewpoint of a postmodern feminist than I could write from a viewpoint that will be common in 2315 CE. I personally find it valuable to have access to works written from earlier viewpoints. It would be difficult, if not impossible, to understand history without authentic documents, which include letters, biographies, newspapers and, of course, works of fiction.

Emma by Jane Austen

The summer  lit-fest continues! July 10-16 was spent with Emma, my third Jane Austen novel of 2011. Austen isn't the only author I've revisited this year; she and Charles Dickens are tied so far with three novels each. I've also read two each by James Fenimore Cooper and Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. So far Dickens and Austen are two of my favorites, so I haven't minded reading multiple works by them, but these choices are more a reflection of what I had on hand than of anything else.

Emma Woodhouse is in many ways a different sort of heroine than Elizabeth Bennet or Marianne Dashwood. If you have only read P&P and S&S and you fear that Austen only retells the same story under different names, read Emma.  There are, of course, many similarities, but both the characters and the plot are unique. Emma Woodhouse has no sisters, is very well-off with no financial worries, and she doesn't wish to marry. Rather, Emma prefers to set up romances for other people, and throughout the novel this results in many situations that are alternately hilarious and awkward.

That said, Emma does have similarities with other Austen heroines, and with Austen herself.  Emma is an intelligent young woman without the ability to change her living situation or her everyday life. She doesn't have much to do, and she has few companions her own age. Critics who point out that Austen's heroine's often live lives of little substance should thank Austen for accurately transcribing the safe but meaningless fate of middle- and upper-class women in the early 19th century.

Stats:
Spoiled but smart and lovely: Emma
Aptly named dark horse: George Knightley
Juvenile flirt: Frank Churchill
Nemesis turned friend: Jane Fairfax
Airhead: Harriet Smith
Love to hate: Augusta Elton
Don't eat that!: Henry Woodhouse
There was a lot of: parties, calling, outings, letters, notes, coach rides
There should have been more: descriptions of food. Fluffy novels never talk enough about food.
This book makes you want to: examine the evidence a la Sherlock Holmes, not a la Emma, surround yourself with people and activities of substance
This book makes you glad you don't have to: go calling on people, adhere to severe social protocol, eat thin gruel every night with Mr. Woodhouse

Sense and Sensibility

In mid-June (the 12th-18th, to be exact) I was starting to feel bogged down in my reading, and after reflecting upon my choices the last couple months, I decided that after the heavy seriousness of All Quiet on the Western Front, Jane Eyre, Madame Bovary, Fahrenheit 451, Hard Times, Last of the Mohicans, Tess of the d’Urbervilles, The Grapes of Wrath, The Bell Jar,  and For Whom the Bell Tolls, I needed something light and sparkling. Sense and Sensibility was like a lemon sorbet after two months of mutton chops. (Actually, I've never eaten a mutton chop, but it sounds heavy, doesn't it?) 

     In terms of characters, I encountered some similarities with Pride and Prejudice. There were the philanderer, the hysterical sister(s), the airhead mother, the absent (in mind or body) father, the mysterious but ultimately virtuous gentleman and the humorous secondary characters. The ending is quite balanced and satisfactory, with the rational sister finding a match based on love, and the emotional sister finding happiness with a level-headed man whom she had initially rejected for frivolous reasons.  

     I think most readers prefer Pride and Prejudice over Sense and Sensibility simply because the hero of the former, Mr. Darcy, is far more swoon-worthy than that of the latter. (Sorry, Colonel Barton)  This is partially due to the differing slants of the novels.  In S&S, Austen is contrasting the two sisters and exploring the differences between them.  The various potential suitors are tools to draw out aspects of the sisters' characters and are not developed as fully.  In P&P, Austen is comparing and contrasting Elizabeth Bennet and Fitzwilliam Darcy, which obviously requires more development of Darcy's character.  Another possible contribution to the differences in focus may lie in the fact that the first draft of S&S was written when Austen was only 19 (!), before she had experienced any romantic relationships, while the first draft of P&P was written two years later, after her relationship with Tom Lefroy.

      I certainly found Sense and Sensibility enjoyable in its own right, with interesting plot devices and humorous characters, although overall I must side with the majority in preferring Pride and Prejudice.

Stats:

Two steps backward for feminism: Marianne

Finally, a girl who thinks: Elinor

Karma's gonna get you in the end: John Dashwood

Everything is okay ma'am, please put down the pocketbook: Mrs. Dashwood

Warning: Contains dry ice. Do not handle without protective gloves: Fanny Dashwood

Why, you evil toad of a man!: John Willoughby

Somebody please put codeine in her tea: Mrs. Jennings

And valium in hers: Mrs. Ferrars

Knight in shining...cravat?: Colonel Barton

There was a lot of: note writing, misunderstandings, descriptions of rooms, tiresome visitors, humorous situations, similarities with Pride and Prejudice

There should have been more: development of Colonel Barton and Edward Ferrars' characters

This book makes you want to: read more Jane Austen, visit interesting friends, make sure you're not an airhead

This book makes you glad you don't have to: adhere to proper 19th century English social conventions

Last of the Mohicans

This is the second (in order of publication) of Cooper's Leatherstocking Tales, following The Pioneers, which I read in March.  Once again, I embarked upon a mental portage for the first 300 pages, after which the plot sped up somewhat, but although I patiently awaited some of the thoughtful, even philosophical musings encountered near the end of The Pioneers, I was ultimately disappointed. Don't get me wrong, as a plot-based historical novel Mohicans can hold the reader's interest, but it lacked the depth of Cooper's earlier volume. There are three more novels in the Leatherstocking Tales, and I am interested to see which precedent they will follow.  I know I will be reading The Prairie at some point this year, as it is already in my possession, but The Deerslayer and The Pathfinder will likely wait until next year.

The plot of the novel differs noticeably from that of the 1992 film, so if you've seen the movie but haven't read the book, don't worry, I'm not mixing up the sisters....not that it would be difficult to do so when both characters are one-dimensional stereotypes of 19th century women.  Speaking of which, let's talk about Cora. One piece of information that is fairly important in the novel but omitted from the movie is the fact that Cora is one-quarter black (but technically not African-American, as her mother was from the Caribbean). Why would the screenwriter (or casting director? whoever) skip over this? Probably because it is implied as a reason for Magua's attraction for her as well as for her more strong-willed and intense temperament. This then begs the question of why it would be problematic for Magua to be attracted to her due to her racial origins. To the 21st century reader it seems obvious that individuals have varying levels of attraction to people of different ethnicities. Part of the difficulty lies in the stereotypical representation of Magua as a sly, sneaky, violent and deceptive Indian. To put it bluntly, in Cooper's world, the villain of inferior race, when presented with two women, chooses the one who is also of inferior race.  So you can see why Hollywood wasn't going to touch that with a ten-foot canoe paddle.

     Now, before you get the idea that I think Cooper is a racist pig, I must state that I stand by my previous opinion of him as quite advanced for his time in his ideas of race and culture. Let's look at Uncas, for example.  If Magua is the sly, sneaky Indian and Chingachgook is the stoic noble savage, Uncas is an admirable and courageous hero whose depiction rises above ethnic stereotype. Hawkeye and Cora point out at different times that Uncas' behavior is commendable. Hawkeye comments that Uncas is pretty awesome for an Indian (my paraphrase) *sigh*, while Cora states that anyone who observed Uncas' actions would forget the color of his skin. Cooper then portrays the other characters as being uncomfortable with Cora's statement, which would have indeed been a historically accurate response. Cora (and Cooper) were ahead of their time.

    Related but not identical to Cooper's exploration of interracial relationships is his portrayal of culture conflict. Heyward represents the soldier ideal in American culture, while David Gamut is the Calvinist Protestant and Hawkeye is the frontiersman. These three men clash with each other throughout the novel, so how can such an internally discordant culture, one which can't even agree with itself, be expected to instantly enter civil discourse with not just one completely foreign Native American tribe, but many? Thus, Cooper makes his point more clearly than would have been possible had he permitted less conflict among the male American characters.

     Cooper further sets out issues of cultural conflict through his use of several names to refer to one person, tribe or place. To name something or someone is to assert dominance over that person or thing, and the fact that each group had their own names for other groups/people is used as a device by Cooper to signify the struggle between them. Nathaniel Bumppo calls himself Natty but is also known as Hawkeye by the Mohicans and La Longue Carabine by the French and Huron. The Iroquois are alternately Maquas and Mingoes, the Delaware are the Leni-Lenape, Chingachgook is Le Gros Serpent and Magua is Sly Fox. Even Lake Horican is also Lake George and Le Lac du St. Sacrament. Uncas originally carries the title Last of the Mohicans because he was the last born of his tribe, but after his death, his father, Chingachgook becomes Last of the Mohicans. Symbolically, Chingachgook represents not only the last of his tribe, but the last of all Indian culture, ultimately destroyed by the coming of the Europeans and their settlement of the frontier.

Stats:
Heroes: Uncas, Hawkeye
Villain: Magua
More sappy prairie women: Cora and Alice, but especially Alice
Over sensationalized: Indian massacre
Under explored: character of Hawkeye...but I do have 3 more volumes to go so I'll let it slide
There was a lot of: dialogue, tracking, descriptions of nature, hiking through the forest
There should have been more: comic relief. I think Cooper was trying with David Gamut, but I personally don't find much humor in strict Calvinists...
This book makes you want to: appreciate the alien beauty of the wilderness, appreciate the alien beauty of a person you don't understand (hmm...think Cooper chose his setting to correspond with his themes?)
This book makes you glad you don't have to: faint regularly as proof of your XX chromosomes, engage in hand-to-hand combat as proof of your XY chromosomes, rely on a guide who is trying to trick you, be the last living member of your tribe

The Pioneers: The Sources of the Susquehanna; a Descriptive Tale

Yes, that's the entire title, and I chose to use it to distinguish this novel from O Pioneers!, which might have come to your mind if I had only written The Pioneers.  This book is the first published (fourth chronologically) of the Leatherstocking Tales by James Fenimore Cooper, and it sold 3,500 copies before noon on the day it was published (1823).  Most famous of the Leatherstocking Tales is the second chronologically, The Last of the Mohicans, which is sometimes called >adopt reverent tone< THE GREAT AMERICAN NOVEL.  (Incidentally, this should remove a weight from the minds of all you aspiring American writers, in that, since Cooper has already written the great American novel, you don't have to!) I have chosen to read all five of them this year, and I was undecided whether to read them in order of chronology or of publication, until someone suggested doing the latter in order to more easily follow Cooper's development as a writer.  That appealed to me, so down I sat with The Pioneers.

Egads. After about 300 pages, I was considering greasing my eyeballs to allow them to slide over the text more quickly. It was, how you say, le boring.  And then, somewhere around page 325 (I'm guessing), the clouds parted, the sun beamed down, the birds sang and somebody smacked Cooper upside the head and said, "Get going!!"   Well. After that the plot took off galloping and didn't stop until a finish that crammed in everything.  Instead of spreading out the literary goodness over the entire novel, Cooper was rather stingy at the beginning, and then piled it on at the end.  Seriously, in approximately the last 100 pages, you will find  SPOILERS AHEAD>>>  entrapment, poaching, a weaponized stand off, a trial, a jailbreak, a wildfire, rescue of damsel in distress (twice), the death of a noble chief, appearance of a long lost friend/relative, revelation of a character's true identity, confession of true love, proposal and marriage, burial and romantic epitaphs, poetic speeches about death, the afterlife, wilderness, civilization, law and justice, and finally the hero walks off into the sunset.
END SPOILERS

Now, before you think Cooper a tired cliche for having his hero walk off into the sunset, let me point out that The Pioneers was the first novel to contain such an exit. Far from cliche, this was original and very romantic (in the original sense of the word).  Also romantic is the continuous tension between wilderness and settlement.  Cooper addresses issues of environmental stewardship, conservation and use, and is possibly the first novelist to do so.  He also pointedly demonstrates the difference between justice and law, and the fact that the law exists to serve itself (or possibly power).  He devises a surprisingly universalist hero for an American in 1823, as can be seen in Hawkeye's statement that, although whites want to be buried facing east and Indians want to be buried facing west, after death they will meet in the land of the just.

Despite being far ahead of his time in many ways, there are other areas in which Cooper has not shed the conventional prejudices of his day.  The portrayal of black slaves and freedmen as childlike is similar to or slightly worse than that of Mark Twain's Huck Finn (written a generation later than the Leatherstocking Tales). Expect to see the "N" word in the first few chapters, used by black people as often as by whites.  That said, Cooper was the first American novelist to include African American characters at all, so even his stereotypical portrayal was a milestone. As for women, they are virtuous but mentally vacuous, occasionally fainting and getting into dangerous predicaments from which they require rescuing.  Their main functions are as daughters, servants and wives, but not mothers, interestingly. (Both mothers are dead).  A contemporary critic wrote of Cooper: "the women he draws from one model don't vary / All sappy as maples and flat as a prairie."  Despite these shortcomings, Cooper's portrayal of Native Americans is varied and complicated. He succeeds, through the course of the Leatherstocking Tales, in creating contrasts between some Native characters that are noble and heroic and others with few redeeming qualities.  In this, he demonstrates his view of Native Americans as a large group with certain tendencies, but comprised of individuals with different characters. In other words, they have the dignity and depth of any other human culture group.

As a short aside, I must question whether Cooper was a genius. You see, he was enrolled at Yale at age 13, but was expelled after a dangerous prank that involved him blowing up another student's door. Another less dangerous prank consisted of training a donkey to sit in a professor's chair. That certainly looks like the work of a genius to me. ;)

Stats:
ponderously annoying semi-main character: Judge Marmaduke
maple and prairie female: Elizabeth
ethnic stereotypes: the German guy, the French guy, the black guy, the English guy 
hero: Hawkeye, aka Leatherstocking, aka Nathaniel Bumpo, aka Natty Bumpo
comrade of aforementioned hero: Chingachgook  (also of The Last of the Mohicans fame)
there was a lot of : trees, wildlife, use and misuse of said trees and wildlife
there should have been more of: women with brains...or at least personalities...
this book makes you want to: preserve some unspoiled wilderness, treat people right, get away from stupid people
this book makes you glad you don't have to: be a woman or ethnic minority in 1823




Edit: I read and reviewed The Last of the Mohicans in May.

Pride and Prejudice

Alas, the poor blog languisheth.  I finished Pride and Prejudice five days ago, and am well into the next one on my list, but I haven't had a chance to compose an entry until now.  I know you're all dying to know my opinion.

Although I have seen several film versions of this Jane Austen classic, at last I have taken the opportunity to read the book itself.  The film versions do justice to the plot and dialogue, but there is much in the structure of the novel that can't adequately be captured on film.  The first part of the book takes place mainly as a series of performances in the public sphere, but Darcy's letter to Elizabeth is a clear divide, after which the plot and character development take place mainly through letters and internal musing.  This contrast between writing styles parallels the plot development, which begins with the characters' first impressions of each other and interactions with each other, and then moves to a more thoughtful section in which the characters must reassess, and sometimes completely deconstruct, their initial opinions of each other.

There are libraries full of scholarly analyses of Austen's work, and of this novel in particular, which I cannot summarize.  I can merely touch on the book's  relationship to its context and historical setting.  The work itself is set during the period of the French Revolution and the Napoleonic wars, which are only implied in this novel in the movements of troops and garrisons from one English town to another.  War and political issues are never mentioned.  Pride and Prejudice was also written after Mary Wollstonecraft had become well-known as one of the founding feminist philosophers, and Austen's main character Elizabeth, while not feminist in the current sense, certainly has views about the education and role of women, views which conflict with those of her society. (Darcy agrees with Elizabeth on many points.)  The novel is set among the landed gentry of 19th century England, and addresses issues of class, inheritance, perception and identity.  All this, woven into a most delicious love story.

Stats:
Best catch: Mr. Darcy
Guy you want to slap: Mr. Collins
Biggest airhead: Lydia...no, Mrs. Bennet...no, Lydia...no, Mrs. Bennet...no...
There was a lot of: dancing, walking, conversing, analyzing others' behavior
This book makes you want to: write letters, walk in the countryside, play the piano on a quiet evening
This book makes you glad you don't have to: fawn over those in higher social classes, become "accomplished" in frivolous amusements (women), walk three miles to your neighbor's house

Dreams are true while they last...

...and do we not live in dreams?  -Alfred Lord Tennyson

This novel struck me as a very interior work, easily read as a dream in which the dreamer's inner struggles are personified.  To begin with, I was fascinated that the entire setting of Wuthering Heights was like that of a dream state; by this I mean that the world of Wuthering Heights and Thrushcross Grange was self-contained.  Just like a dreamer doesn't wonder how the dream began or how s/he got there, in this novel the the characters unquestioningly accept the strange circumstances of their lives and do not appear to look beyond the geographical boundaries of the moors.  Even the city of London, mentioned a couple times, appears vague, distant and surreal.

Pardon me; you dropped your superego.
For some reason I had misguided expectations of the main romantic relationship in this novel, namely, more love and less hate.  Usually when fictional characters exhibit love, it changes them in some way, or causes them to choose more altruistic actions in order to benefit the object of their love.  Catherine's infantilism and Heathcliff's jealous violence run contrary to my expectations in that area. Despite their supposed eternal love for each other, they destroy each other.  This adds to the eerie, surreal quality of the novel.

SPOILER ALERT:  The paragraph below discusses key plot lines and events.

Apocalyptic Fantasy
I think Brontë's decision to carry the plot through the second generation of the two families was critical, but I know a lot of film versions end their portrayal with Catherine's death.  I don't know why filmmakers would choose to focus only on Cathy's and Heathcliff's unrequited love, because I found Heathcliff's manner of death and the redemption (intellectual, moral and social) of Hareton Earnshaw to be key plot elements.  In fact, the transformation of Hareton by Cathy Linton adds to the fantastical mood of the novel, as it contains a strong "Beauty and the Beast" element.  The final romance between Hareton and Cathy brings with it not a happy resolution to an unhappy story, but rather the peaceful yet shaky new beginning that comes after an apocalyptic end.  The theme of devolution before evolution lies heavily across the final pages of Wuthering Heights. 

Interpretation
So is Cathy forced to choose between nature and culture? Between id and superego? Between altruism and selfishness? Between her construction of Edgar and her construction of Heathcliff? Or simply between Edgar and Heathcliff?  This ambiguity of interpretation is part of what causes readers to return to this book.  Every time it is reread, the reader sees something new. 
Brava, Ms. Brontë.

Stats:
Favorite character: Hareton Earnshaw
Most annoying character: Catherine Earnshaw
Character that started out annoying but mostly redeemed himself: Edgar Linton
Favorite quote:  "But there's this difference: one is gold put to the use of paving-stones, and the other is tin polished to ape a service of silver."  (chapter 21)
Oddest moment: Isabella Linton making lumpy porridge
Sense of place: 10 out of 10
There was a lot of : bad weather, doorways, windows, high walls, locks
There should have been more: bad weather, deja vu, dialogue between Catherine and Heathcliff
Descriptive passages: 9 out of 10 for quality, but I wish there had been more of them