In A Killing Mood

I woke up in a really bad mood yesterday and decided I was going to kill off Gilbert Osmond in my sequel to "The Portrait of a Lady." It’s not that I have so much against him, it was just something to do. I thought if I got rid of him all the women--Isabel, Pansy, Madame Merle, Countess Gemini--could be free of his burdensome presence and have some fun in Palazzo Roccanera. I sat down to begin writing and decided I might need this character for conflict. Too bad. I was really looking forward to writing about an accident I’d conjured up for him. I’ll save this passage for possible later use. Instead I killed off Caspar Goodwood who wasn’t much a part of anything and I was sick of him popping up in HJ's novel, stalking Isabel and refusing to take no for an answer. He adds nothing to her story; just a rejected suitor from her youth who won’t move on. I was hoping I could have him go down with the Titanic but we’re still in the 19th century so that wouldn’t work. I won’t say how I killed him off, I’ll keep it a mystery so I don’t give away the story, such as it is, with no real plot I’m set on. But I keep writing...

The Missing Three Years

Last night I went back and read chapter XXXIV where Isabel listens to her cousin Ralph while he tries to discourage her from marrying Gilbert Osmond by telling her she will be put in a cage. After a long conversation where Isabel assures him at the beginning he needn’t bother as she is quite set on the thing, Isabel asks at the end, “Do you think I am in trouble?” and he replies “One is in trouble when one is in error.”

Moving into chapter XXXV we listen to Gilbert Osmond profess fine words to his betrothed on their future happiness, his own delight. “I won’t pretend I’m sorry you’re rich; I’m delighted. I delight in everything that’s yours--whether it be money or virtue. Money’s a horrid thing to follow, but a charming thing to meet.” When Osmond’s daughter Pansy is told she says it’s very delightful, “…you and papa will suit each other. You’re both so quiet and serious.”

The couple marries without fanfare and we are moved three years forward not privy to anything that happens in those three years except that a son is born, to die six months later. How did he die? What was his name? We don’t know. In the 19th century it was not uncommon for babies to die in the first year. James doesn’t seem to have anything to say on this event and it is lightly passed over. Why include it at all? Today the death of a six-month-old son would be worthy of a few sentences if we are, as James said, studying the psychological motives of our character. We have no idea if or how this affected Mrs. Osmond and certainly not Gilbert Osmond. Again, I may be trying to inflict 21st-century psychometrics on the 19th century. But just because babies frequently do not make it to the first birthday does not mean a shock hasn’t taken place. I could come back to this in my sequel but should I? I just have a nagging suspicion that part of the couple’s disdain for each other may have begun with the death of this son. But we don’t know, it was not a part of HJ’s framework.

So all happiness was expected and all happiness lost with all the naysayers (almost everyone in the story) proven correct. That is the compelling drama of TPOAL. It is also what bothers me; those missing three years. How have they become enemies within three years? Not that it can’t happen, marriages often break down in three years, give or take. But why in this case? The question hasn’t been answered to my satisfaction. Nevertheless, Mr. and Mrs. Osmond have fallen apart and that is what I have to grapple with to write a sequel.

Where Am I To Go With This?

Tossing around in bed last night while the rest of the country was worrying over their need of gainful employment, lack of health insurance, swindled investments and the cost of a good haircut, I was obsessing about Isabel Archer Osmond and Company. I had two things going on that were not necessarily in agreement: One, I wanted to end “The Portrait of a Lady,” do what James wouldn’t do which was to tidy up all the loose ends and conclude the saga of Isabel and her failed marriage. (Have her divorce the beast or suck it up and find new interests.) By chapter five I had already done that. I had the couple reach a truce in chapter two and all the other characters falling into a set place with nary a conflict or piece of misery anywhere. Everyone is happy. Or at least accepting;

Two, while it is my natural instinct to give Isabel a happy ending, or at least a life-goes-on-such-as-it-is ending, a sequel must have its own story which is conflict, action, resolution. I’m in over my head and find it tough going inventing a story set in the 19th century in a foreign country. Now what?

Now I don’t have a sequel is what. I have an ending that James might have used but did not care for happily-ever-after, rarely used it, was chastised and made to suffer for it especially when he wanted to convert his novels into plays to make some serious money. He was told the theatre-going public would not tolerate a story without a happy ending, he tested that theory and found out the hard way, it was true. So biting the bullet, excuse the cliché, “The American” was the rewritten to those ends only to see it fail miserably at the box office while his nemesis Oscar Wilde succeeded brilliantly and lucratively which had been Mr. James‘s goal all along. James thought Wilde’s plays trivial exploitation, riddled with nonsense. The public loved them. He thought Wilde an exhibitionist and a major poseur. The public showered him with praise. Nothing much has changed. Just substitute literary novel into Hollywood screenplay and you understand Mr. James’s wretchedness. Not to be daunted he tried for several years to write successful plays and still dejectedly failed. His heart was broken and his coffers mostly unrewarded. I include a few quotes on the night his failed play ended in hisses and boos: The theatre is an abyss of vulgarity & of brutish platitude: from which one ought doubtless to welcome any accident that detaches one. And then, I have practically renounced my deluded dreams. The horridest four weeks of my life.

In the end he could not write seriously a happy ending; and when he attempted to change the outcome the whole thing fell apart. It was his idea that a novel should be the stuff of realism and psychological investigation and wanted no part of infantile fantasy.

And that is why I was awake last night wondering what I have gotten myself into. How could I pull this off without delving into the worlds of schlock and soap opera the master would abhor? I didn’t even get around to my own unemployment, lack of health insurance, homelessness, bankruptcy and really bad hair. But I have my priorities and HJ cannot fault me there.

"Henry James: The Imaginative Genius," by Fred Kaplan was used as a reference for this post. It is unavailable through Amazon, hence, no link but other biographies are available if you would like to read more on Henry James.

Italian Hours (I Wish)

I’ve discovered a little problem writing my sequel to “The Portrait of a Lady” and that problem is Italy. Or the fact that I have never been there. Henry James spent much time in Italy and set most of TPOAL in Florence and Rome. While writing TPOAL he fell absolutely in love with Venice. He described the "pure light air," talked of his room "flooded with the splendid sunshine," and in Florence, his "supercelestial" villa with "the most beautiful views on earth," so enchanting, so seductive was its spell he was often unable to work. He had a large community of friends in the three cities and plenty of distraction. Nevertheless, he was able to give a luxurious rendering of the Italian cities that alas, I will be unable to emulate in my sequel unless someone out there wants to take me to Italy. I am available for this journey, I am unemployed and free as can be, vowing to write something worthwhile if only for myself. As it is, I can only use second-hand material, either from TPOAL or from James’s travel writings and letters, or just information on the Internet. If I were in a villa in Florence, a palazzo in Rome or an apartment in Venice I could sparkle with descriptive passages while modulating the relationship of Isabel and Osmond. A simple hotel room would probably work just fine.

That said, James did not spend a great deal of wordage describing scenery in TPOAL. This was a character-driven novel and besides Isabel Archer Osmond, there were plenty of other characters that had to be rounded out, piles of dialogue and psychological insight to administer though he was able with a few succinct descriptions to place us in Italy with the Osmonds, especially in Palazzo Roccanera, their home in Rome. So it will probably be alright if I’m a little thrifty with descriptions as I will be busy with the Osmonds, Madame Merle, Pansy, Henrietta Stackpole Bantling and Mrs. Touchett. I also plan to introduce a few more characters so I may be forgiven if I can’t with any sensuousness describe the Italian light, its smells, the beauty of the people, the grace of the gondoliers, the cathedrals, piazzas, ruins…the sunrises and sunsets. If I do, I’ve either got a wonderful imagination, Mr. James is speaking to me from the afterlife, or I read it in a travel guide. That is, unless someone wants to take me to Italy and be of assistance with a more accurate portrayal. Below you will find links to a couple of HJ’s books on Italy. He wrote a great many travel pieces on Europe for American magazines that were later compiled into books. It was good money and earning money was necessary to live the good life which he certainly did. While residing in London he dreamed of Italy. I’m dreaming of Italy myself--I hope it will help.

Gilbert Osmond: Total Rat or Just Misunderstood?

Gilbert Osmond remains somewhat of a mystery to me. We know he married for money but we are not at all sure he didn’t admire Isabel a little. He said some very touching things to her in their courtship. He told Madame Merle he thought her full of grace and charm. But three years into the marriage we learn she is unhappy but I am not sure if it is because he is a bully, an emotional blackmailer, a woman-hater or any combination thereof, or if Isabel simply gets on his nerves with her opinions and personality, nothing more than an innate incompatibility that time will distill as it does for many couples after the initial shock of recognition takes place, after the courtship ends and reality sets in. Is he devious? Yes, certainly. Is he violent? Isabel says he is not violent, but simply “he does not care for me.” What does that imply? In another passage she says “It’s not you, it is me he hates.” Is she just oversensitive, overly dramatic? Is she reacting to a lack of affection or lack of respect? Does he disregard her physically and does a lack of sexual interest recoil inside of her as a snaky form of rejection? It’s hard to know. James does not exactly spell it out. All we know is that Osmond married for money, though not solely for money, is attached to his own ideas, fond of having his own way, is petulant, condescending and keeps his wife at arm’s length. The same could be said of her. Yet the relationship began with affection and warmth. Where did it go? We don’t know. Osmond tells Madame Merle that he wished to be “adored” but since that is not to be, he has to live with it.

James spends many chapters with the surrounding characters, Isabel’s friends, while they speculate on her marriage, the state of her mind but Isabel herself offers little but that yes, she is to be pitied. She admits she is unhappy, but doesn’t tell us exactly why other than her husband apparently can’t stand her. Why not? A feminist reading on the novel tells us it's the old standby: the need for a husband to dominate and defuse a strong woman with "ideas." I can agree up to a point but to me the situation screams sexual incompatibility, something James would never broach.

I think Mr. James got tired of Isabel after a while and gave up on her. As a man, he couldn’t quite get inside the head of a mature woman in an unhappy marriage. He was not married and perhaps tinkering with the Osmond’s marriage became too challenging for his limited resources. He had an idea of a lady, what might happen if certain events were put in place but it got too complicated when the actual marriage became the story. He was only interested in Isabel Archer Osmond up to a point; that point being her choice once free of monetary concern, after which, he lost interest. He did his fact-finding, he reported the findings. He did not go in for the “so then what happened?” the book was quite long enough and he worked on deadline.

So as I speculate, I've begun my sequel and have only to figure out Osmond's state of mind. Is he the bad guy? It would certainly make my job easier if I could make him a really odious character, given to pettiness, infidelity, shady dealings, collusion. But James did not go in for such easy assertions. He wanted to make a fiction that was like life and in life there are many shades a gray. In marriage it's usually he who weeps and wails the loudest is the victim but it's not necessarily the truth. My first chapters have him petulant, sore over his wife's trip to England, peeved at having been outed by his sister--he's lost a lot of leverage with that and mostly bored by Isabel, except for the money of course. You see, I've a lot to flesh out with Gilbert Osmond.

The following books were used for reference in this post:
Modern Critical Interpretations Henry James’s The Portrait of a Lady, Harold Bloom editor; ISBN 1-55546-008-9
Modern Novelists, Henry James, by Alan W. Bellringer, ISBN 0-312-02056-2

Meandering with Isabel

I am meandering around with Isabel Osmond’s life, not certain where it will go. I’ve brought her back to Rome, back to the Palazzo Roccanera and her flinty, mean-spirited husband Gilbert Osmond, had her stand up to him on the first day back and tried to portray him as James had. He is a most interesting character. More on him in the next post. I’m pleased with the second chapter where the couple meets after her return and talk it out. I felt so satisfied with the dialogue I was psyched up enough to begin this blog. Now I’m ruffling through the characters,  reading Isabel’s state of mind hoping to find some new conflict that will make a story. I have Isabel and Osmond in a truce for now which doesn’t make for exciting reading but truces end, don't they?

James had Madame Merle leaving for America where she was to stay for some time but I decided she was too worthy of a character to put in exile, too much a part of the story to ignore. I brought her back from America  early with a rich husband in tow. I wanted to do something nice for her: James left her in a failed state, pitiful, banished and despised by Isabel, Osmond and  Pansy, who is her daughter, though the girl is as of yet unaware of her parentage. Will I change that?  I’m not sure. I first want to know who is the real Madame Merle and will write more on her later.

Henrietta Stackpole is an appealing character; a feisty, opinionated American journalist, who incidentally,  has the last line in the story with the unsatisfactory ending. I’ve put her prominently in my sequel beginning in the seventh chapter but am not sure how much of her life I really want to go into, or rather, how important she will figure in Isabel‘s life. James had her ready to start a newspaper with a legacy from Ralph Touchett and I’m keeping with that though I changed it to a magazine. We both agreed it was high time she married Mr. Bantling so I have her married and settling in London.

Isabel plans to find a suitable husband for Osmond's daughter Pansy after her father refused her first suitor, Edward Rosier in James’s story. Osmond wanted her to fetch a better price, namely marriage to Lord Warburton, but that did not go as he hoped for which he blamed Isabel. I was adamant that I’d  rescue poor little Pansy in my sequel. I have Mr. Rosier engaged to a French girl though he shows up once more at the Osmonds Thursday evening soiree to goad Osmond and attest his sincerity to Pansy. Though she is not a large character, maybe will figure as a catalyst for more trouble with Osmond. She’s sweet and docile, not the stuff of  high drama. Unless…

So there we are. I have the first six chapters completed to my satisfaction and the first draft of chapters seven, eight and nine but as I said, have not got the exact gist of the situation installed in my outline nor my mind. “Brick by brick” as Mr. James said.

Mr. Sargent's Painting

"Street in Venice," by John Singer Sargent
1882, oil on wood.

I just finished reading a book on blogging that suggests pictures are a necessity to break up the text on the blog. I didn't want any old picture so I thought of what I would use on a book jacket when or if such an opportunity should arise. So now one of my favorite paintings graces my blog and it portrays who I think of as Isabel Archer when she was young and free, before Gilbert Osmond. The painting is, as it says, by John Singer Sargent and works well for my purpose. It was painted in 1882 and "The Portrait of a Lady" was published in 1880-81 so they work nicely together. Sargent spent much time painting in Venice. James fell in love with Venice working on TPOAL: He set most of the novel in Italy. Both were American expatriates highly regarded in their artistic endeavors. They were very good friends, knew many of the same people and were sought after. Both remained single throughout their lives. The artist painted HJ's portrait in 1913. I won't go any  further on Mr. Sargent, but you get the picture. I hope it inspires you to see the original in Washington D.C. It's one fantastic painting.

So now we have some visual interest, I've done my part. I have to get back to my sequel, no easy task.

Me and Mr. James

I began writing a sequel to “The Portrait of a Lady,” Henry James’s “big” work that he intended to be his masterpiece with more than a little trepidation. I don’t for a moment pretend to write like the master. Mr. James was far too eloquent to be glibly imitated and far too worldly to be replicated by myself. His was a work of the 19th century but his writing life was filled with many of the same modes and manners of 21st century publishing: Low sales, constant rewrites, bad reviews, failed stories, competition and the desire to live up to the greatest in literature. Add to it all, the ambition to create something grand and lasting when the culture was often shallow, venal and narcissistic.

For myself, it has always been one of my top five novels, possibly the top, along with "Middlemarch,” “Washington Square,” "Pride and Prejudice” and “Persuasion.” But it was with the fourth reading this past year that I realized I still do not know Isabel Archer Osmond though I should: James put so much into this character that we should know her perfectly. Still, I have many questions about her; her reactions and mostly her marriage. James said he was going to build a character "brick by brick" and see what would be the result. These days, a character has to be spelled out completely or the story would be said to be, unrealized or ambiguous leaving the reader with a sense of unfinished business. Critics also thought it to have an unsatisfactory ending, in fact no ending at all, to which he replied, I’ve given you a look at a character within a time frame. It is for others to answer the question of what happens outside of this frame, though I am not directly quoting him.

Since James left it open, I take that as a challenge to continue on with the life of Isabel Osmond, at least her weary return to Rome after her beloved cousin’s funeral and to what life will offer her after knowing the truth of her husband’s betrayal, Madame Merle’s part, his daughter’s maternity and her own “unhappiness” that now has a point of reference. I do not yet know how far this will take me into her life, maybe just a year or two. Maybe I just want to get even with Gilbert Osmond and Madame Merle. Maybe I want to see little “limited” Pansy saved from her father’s egomania. I’m beginning with an open mind. Maybe I will save this marriage. Or not. We’ll see. I plan to build it brick by brick as James did and see what we are learn. I have a no-nonsense newspaper style not given to flourish and ambiguity. Still, I wish to be true to the characters, their speech patterns, personalities and positions. It would be natural to make Gilbert Osmond the demon but is he necessarily and not just a snobbish European patriarch with an emotionally immature wife? Is Madame Merle a conniving witch or a mother seeking the best for her daughter? Is Isabel an innocent abroad or budding feminist seeking her own ideas and way? Is the marital struggle one of two egocentric personalities fighting for dominance? She is much loved and highly regarded by her friends and family but is she a warm and responsive wife? Does she even like men? She turned down two highly regarded specimens before settling on Osmond whom she thought less likely to consume her.

By the way, I'm already up to chapter six in my sequel. Not bad. I'm not at all sure where I'm heading with this. I've outlined some ideas but haven't gotten the real feel for where Mr. and Mr. Osmond will end up. That will be the purpose of this blog: trying to figure out just what Mr. James would do and what I can make of them. Stay with me, but I must tell you, I'm not going to post my sequel here. That will be for a publisher. But I will let you experience with me the laborious process of continuing where the master left off. It's off to Rome. Vel