tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3383938214852108244.post3960135927256919323..comments2024-03-29T03:04:00.853-05:00Comments on Wuthering <br>Expectations: You think too much about money! - getting the sums right in Washington SquareAmateur Reader (Tom)http://www.blogger.com/profile/13675275555757408496noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3383938214852108244.post-82294210459335036532012-04-14T17:56:34.625-05:002012-04-14T17:56:34.625-05:00I had not thought of that - as if Forster is one t...I had not thought of that - as if Forster is one to speak! As if he has the slightest idea what Henry Wilcox does at work.<br /><br />Even the early serious novels about workers - <i>Mary Barton</i>, say - have almost nothing in them about work.<br /><br />Only Naturalist and Modernists were willing to be so boring as to describe in any detail what an office schlub or assembly line cog actually does. And I am am not sure it was so common with them.Amateur Reader (Tom)https://www.blogger.com/profile/13675275555757408496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3383938214852108244.post-16440900561784049462012-04-14T13:42:46.821-05:002012-04-14T13:42:46.821-05:00James's "In the Cage," about a teleg...James's "In the Cage," about a telegraph operator, and in The Princess Casamassima, Hyacinth Robinson is a bookbinder who becomes friends with Paul Muniment, who works "at a wholesale chemist's." <br /><br />In general, it is very rare that any novel of the nineteenth century deals with the nature of work. Even the so-called socially engaged novels mostly detail the consequences of having a particular kind of work, but they rarely make an effort to tell the reader what weaver or a farm laborer actually does all day long. <br /><br />As for Forster, I'm not sure that his novels tell us much more about work than James's do. We know that the Schlegels think that it must be useful to work in a bank -- if you should be so unlucky as to need to generate you own income. And we can see the amusing conflict between people who have inherited money and those who are still making a fortune. But that's not exactly a hard-eyed look at the world of work.Die geneigte Leserinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3383938214852108244.post-36296466894960018882012-04-13T19:41:47.343-05:002012-04-13T19:41:47.343-05:00Another hypothesis about the money, one I ignored,...Another hypothesis about the money, one I ignored, is that James doesn't know what he's talking about. There's a crazy woman employed as a governess in one story, I know that much. And there are some painters and writers.<br /><br />Trollope is usually careful to signal in multiple ways where a person falls in the social ranking, so knowing exactly what a specific number means is less important. <i>Washington Square</i> does not really do that, perhaps because of the novel's narrow scope. It does not try to cover all of society, thank goodness - grouping those four people gives James plenty to do.<br /><br />Because Chekhov is right, with the caveat "All you really need etc. etc. plus a comical aunt or uncle."Amateur Reader (Tom)https://www.blogger.com/profile/13675275555757408496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3383938214852108244.post-15806290067256142552012-04-13T11:28:49.746-05:002012-04-13T11:28:49.746-05:00I'm about a month behind you on reading Washin...I'm about a month behind you on reading <i>Washington Square</i>. I have a LoA edition I bought just for the readalong and then I got way off task and off schedule. But the discussion of money will no doubt help me when I get around to Mr James again.<br /><br />I like your comments from earlier this week about the book having essentially a cast of four persons who James constantly groups and regroups to expose character. He worked that technique pretty spectacularly in <i>The Ambassadors</i>, too. And Chekhov would tell you that narrative success is all about properly grouping your elements. "All you really need is a man, a woman, and a reason for them to be unhappy" etc.<br /><br />Realizing that James was born into money goes a long way toward explaining why he knew so little about <i>jobs</i>. Are there any actual employed folk in James' stories aside from servants? I think Forster complained about this in <i>Aspects of the Novel</i>.<br /><br />Thanks, though, for this exploration of cash. I know that when I read Austen and someone's got ten-thousand pounds a year, I figure from the context that ten-thousand is a lot, but I really have only a vague idea of his economic status. Economic/social status is a huge part of Austen's story arcs so I know I'm missing out. Same with Hank, clearly.scott g.f.baileyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05726743149139510832noreply@blogger.com