by Edith Wharton
Winner of the Pulitzer Prize in 1921
Several years ago I had a conversation with a friend who expressed frustration at not being able to find a good comprehensive list of cutting edge books to read. I mentioned the Pulitzer winners since I have the attention span of a goldfish and did not fully consider his predicament. The winners of the Pulitzer Prize for novels and fiction are (with some exceptions) generally not cutting edge. I do not know exactly how the Pulitzer is awarded (which does kind of seem like something I should have, you know, researched a little bit before posting), but in my mind it is similar to how the Oscars are picked. My general reaction to the Oscar nominees is that there is a movie that should win, and a movie that will win. Usually the movie that I say will win over the one that should is a fine movie, but there is something about it that is just a little too safe. Think A Beautiful Mind over Gosford Park or Gladiator over Traffic. This is one of the reasons I am reading this list in tandem with the Time Magazine List which is a little more...I don't know, is "hip" the right word? It is interesting to think if the Pulitzer committee had decided to go with the rather odd melange of stylistic weirdness that was F. Scott Fitzgerald's first novel, or the awesome Winesburg, Ohio as opposed to The Age of Innocence what sort of tone the prize would have taken later on. This is right at the beginning of the ex-pat movement, and it seems odd that the Pulitzer would pick an Edith Wharton novel, a move that is the direct polar opposite of hip. This is not as bad as when Crash won Best Picture (that still makes me mad!), but it reveals something of the Pulitzer sensibility.
Did Edith Wharton ever write a novel with a happy ending? Every single book I've read by her deals with people who have the audacity to make an attempt at happiness and are beaten down by a surprisingly unforgiving universe. In college I had to read Ethan Frome about six times. Do you know what reading Ethan Frome six times does to the psyche? Nothing good, let me assure you. Universe to Ethan: You do not get to be happy. But I won't kill you, I will just force you to live in an unending agony. The Age of Innocence is a little better in terms of the permanence and form of the universe's temperament. The story deals with an up and coming man named Newland Archer who has just become engaged to a young woman named May. His decision to become engaged to May seems to come from the desire to maintain order in his life, and, since we as readers know this is a terrible reason to get married, we know that nothing good will come of this. He becomes acquainted with May's cousin Ellen, an older woman who is escaping from a disastrous marriage from a Polish Count. Ellen is independent in a way that impresses Newland, and when she decides to divorce her husband, Newland and May's family spend a considerable amount of time with her in order to offset societal damage. It is during this time that Newland falls in love with Ellen.
Wharton wrote very knowing books about characters navigating social circles, and how if one has a goal or desire that exists beyond societal rules, attempting to sate those desires in the open will lead to ruin. On top of that, Wharton seemed to be suggesting that society itself was sick, and in a sick society, she seemed to be asking, how can a healthy love flourish? Characters can be dishonest and duplicitous, but as long as they are discreet, society turns a blind eye. Newland has a desire, and a certain view of himself, and these cannot coexist in the world he has created for himself. Wharton plays a high-wire act towards the end of the novel, as Newland's temptation comes front and center, but the final scenes are as soul-crushingly depressing as any Wharton ever devised.
My initial attitude towards a book like this usually begins with resistance. Part of this comes from a complete lack of connection with the character's issues. However, with little exception, I do enjoy them. As much as I never want to see Ethan Frome again (ever), I have enjoyed other Wharton novels. I loved The House of Mirth, crazy depressing ending and all. I also think it is interesting to consider this book as Wharton's answer to the Henry James novel Portrait of a Lady, whose central character shares a last name with this novel's protagonist.
In 1993 director Martin Scorsese (pronounced Score-say-zee) (that's for Sleepy McEat from my Grad program) adapted The Age of Innocence very successfully. Newland Archer was played by the always awesome Daniel Day-Lewis, who brought the self-satisfied arrogance that becomes dashed by a personal crisis that the role needed. May was played by Winona Ryder, an odd choice, but she was fine. Ellen was played by Michelle Pfeiffer at what I guess would be called the height of her career. The film picks up on the subtleties of the novel in a way that does Scorsese credit (I believe he was following Goodfellas, and if I had been an Edith Wharton aficionado when I was 13, I might have been worried that the film would be a disaster)(and really, looking back, doesn't it seem silly that Dances with Wolves beat Goodfellas?).
Coming Soon:
The main thing I drew from this book was when Mrs. Archer said to May, "In my time a cameo set in pearls was though sufficient," meaning her engagement ring. I remember thinking how beautiful it would be, but I'd never seen a ring like that. When I came across one at a craft show I emptied my bank account to buy it, which was $200 at the time. It was a life changing experience for me. $200 is a lot for a 15 year old. Adrienne will tell you how much that ring meant to me....sadly, the story has a sad ending just like an Edith Wharton novel....I lost the ring almost ten years ago. I still love the book though. I love it for learning about the culture and society though.
ReplyDelete