A simple concept of parallels and contrasts in the lives of sisters, carefully told with gentle irony. It starts in 1864 when Constance and Sophia are 16 and 15 respectively and follows them to the end of their lives. Book 1 covers their teenage years together above and in a draper’s shop in a small town in the Staffordshire Potteries (central England). Book 2 is in the same location, but focuses on Constance. Book 3 is set in Paris during great political upheaval and war, and is about Sophia. In book 4, the two threads come together again. Bennett modelled it on the great realistic French novels of the time (Balzac, Flaubert et al); in some ways it is very mundane, and yet the attention to detail is extraordinary and compelling. As an elderly Sophia muses, “My life has been so queer – and yet every part of it separately seemed ordinary enough.”It opens with a description of the bucolic countryside, observing “But though Constance and Sophia were in it they were not of it” because “no person who lives in the district… ever thinks about the county”, even though it’s so much pleasanter than the busy, dirty town. They are the only children of a bedridden but successful and respected draper whose hatred of “puffing” meant he refused to replace the fallen shop sign lest he “condone, yea, to participate in, the modern craze for unscrupulous self-advertisement”. The draper’s shop and home is their world, and yet their lives end up taking very different paths. Sometimes the contrasts are more parallel than they first seem, and I think this is an aspect that bears further thought and eventual rereading. Constance spends her whole life in the town, living a traditional life as dutiful daughter, wife, mother and widow, whereas Sophia spends many years in France, surviving the Siege of Paris and building independent success. Their lives seem so different, and for Sophia, there is an aspect of missing England when she’s in France and vice versa. However, despite the apparent exoticism of her life, she comes to realise that her “life, in its way, had been as narrow as Constance’s. Though her experience of humanity was wide… she had been utterly absorbed in doing one single thing.”I think the only weak point was some aspects of the ending, but in such a long and wonderful book, it's only a minor issue.SISTERHOODThe sisters are deliberately treated equally: their workboxes “were different but one was not more magnificent than the other. Indeed, a rigid equality was the rule” and yet “in some subtle way, Constance had a standing with her parents which was more confidential than Sofia’s”. This is clear when Mrs Baines confides in Constance about her problems with Sophia: “her tone was peculiar, charged with import, confidential, and therefore very flattering to Constance.”They are close, though they have very different temperaments, with Sophia being the more mischievous and “a prey ripe for the evil one”. She is clever, proud, shrewd with money, independent and obstinate; she would rather suffer than beg or ask for forgiveness. Constance is… suited to her name, like the continuity and familiarity in her life. She is more dutiful and happy to assume she will go into the shop, but Sophia “had always hated the shop. She did not understand how her mother and Constance could bring themselves to be deferential and flattering to every customer that entered”.Their teenage banter, mild naughtiness (trying on mother’s new dress) and sneering at a servant from afar could easily be transplanted to teenage sisters anywhere or when. Curiously, their adult relationship seems more like something from a historical novel than their childhood one. IS BLINDNESS THE PRICE OF LOVE?A recurring theme is the wilful blindness of love, be that of a parent, spouse or even another relative. All the main characters suffer for it in different ways, though one finally acknowledges the truth to herself, if not to others, and “her affection was unimpaired”. Can a child of less than five be bad? Is it “hidden sullenness or mere callous indifference, or a perfect unconsciousness of sin?” And is it misguided to say “If we can be happy only when I give way to him, I must give way to him”? However, that is hard to maintain: “She lived for nothing but to please him; he was, however, exceedingly difficult to please, not in the least because he was hypocritical and exacting, but because he was indifferent… whereas he was the whole of her universe, she was merely a dim figure in the background of his.”MODERNITY AND FEMININE INSIGHT?The book has a curiously modern feeling in some ways. In particular, Sophia’s teenage rebellion doesn’t feel like something from a Victorian novel (though this was written in Edwardian times), either in terms of what she says, or what she does. When defiant, she is sullen and evasive, exhibits a “diffident boldness”, plays the fairness card (“Oh, of course Constance is always right”), answers back with excessive logic (“You tell me not to answer back, and then you say you’re waiting”) and declares “You all want to make me miserable… Put me in prison if you like! I know you’d be glad if I was dead!”. One confrontation ends when, “with a brusque precipitation of herself, vanished upstairs”. I’m sure most modern readers have been involved in such conversations. Although written by a man, all the main characters are women, but they are convincingly and insightfully rendered. For example, Constance’s feelings after her honeymoon are delicately but touchingly described: “She sat there full of new knowledge and new importance, brimming with experience and strange, unexpected aspirations, purposes, yes - and cunnings!...You could see the timid thing [old, virginal Constance] peeping wistfully out of the eyes of the married woman.” And the all-encompassing love of a new mother for her baby, she “dived into the recesses of the perambulator and extricated from its cocoon the centre of the universe, and scrutinised him with quiet passion.” The awkwardness of breastfeeding in front of others, and the stresses of controlled crying (not that it’s called that) are also discussed. At a more trivial level, problems with builders promises, timescales and workmanship are timeless, and the etiquette of all-you-can-eat fare troubled even Edwardians, apparently: the delicate dilemma of “fixed price per day for as much as they can consume while observing the rules of the game… in an instant decided how much they could decently take, and to what extent they could practise the theoretical liberty of choice… they had the right to seize all that was present under their noses, like genteel tigers; and they had the right to refuse; that was all.”(In contrast, it is very Victorian in the way that women can be laid low by severe shock or a bit of a chill.)SYMPATHYIn the Preface, Bennett says “it is an absolute rule that the principal characters of a novel must not be unsympathetic”. I don’t necessarily agree, but he stuck to his principle in this, and the others of his that I have read, which is not to say that his characters are flat or saccharine. And he has no such qualms where some of the minor male characters are concerned. MISCELLANEOUS QUOTES•t“It is to be remembered that in those days Providence was still busying himself [yes, him] with everybody’s affairs.”•tThe wakes (regional festival) were “an orgiastic carnival, gross in all its manifestations of joy. The whole centre of the town was given over to the furious pleasures of the people… displaying all the delights of the horrible.”•t“She was athirst for sympathy in the task of scorning everything local.”•tTypical Bennett: “One of Maggie’s deepest instincts, always held in check by the dominance of Mrs Baines, was to leave pails prominent on the main routes of the house: and now, divining what was at hand, it flamed into insurrection.”•tDr Harrop was “common sense in breeches”.•tWhen Mr Scales mentioned his fox-terrier bitch, he “had no suspicion that he was transgressing a convention by virtue of which dogs have no sex” (and I wonder if any Edwardian readers would have balked at Bennett’s use of the word “sex”).•tBe careful what may be overheard by servants, “A clumsy question might enlighten a member of the class which ought ever be enlightened about one’s private affairs”.•t“The era of good old-fashioned Christmases, so agreeably picturesque for the poor, was not yet at an end.”•t “The remarkable notion that twelve thousand pounds represents the infinity of wealth, that this sum possessed special magical properties which rendered it insensible to the process of subtraction.”•t“Good clothes, when put to the test, survive a change in fortune, as a Roman arch survives the luxury of departed empire.”•t“The irrational obstinacy of a physically weak man who sticks to it that he can defy the laws of nature.”•tBennett loves writing about hotels, and says “critically examining newcomers was one of the amusements of the occupants of the lounge.”•t“The patched and senile drabness of the [hotel] bedroom.”•tYou can tell respectable hotel guests because “their clothes… did not flatter the lust of the eye”.•t“The respectability of a luxury private hotel makes proper every act that passes within its walls.”MODERN BRITISH ASIAN RETELLING!Hugely disappointing, and I suggest avoiding it. My review is here: Marriage Material
A testament to the power and influence of Goodreads is the discovery of this gem which otherwise would have escaped my notice.Bennett grabbed me with the second sentence of his preface and never let go for a moment. In many ways this 5 page preface is more compelling than the actual novel. Here he relates an anecdote of sitting in a favorite cafe when an old woman comes in talking to herself and dropping her parcels. She is the subject of immediate ridicule by the two waitresses, one old enough to know better and one young enough to be more charitable. He muses that this fat, ugly, old woman was once young, slim, perhaps beautiful but most certainly free of her ridiculous mannerisms. He continues that thought with the realization “…that the change from the young girl to the stout aging woman is made up of an infinite number of infinitesimal changes, each unperceived by her…” This is the story he writes but with two sisters, Sophia and Constance, whose lives he chronicles from girlhood through old age across a canvas that stretches from a provincial English town to Paris and back. Initially published in 1908, the story is set in the mid 19th century.This is a book of small moments – the petty disappointments, jealousies, power struggles and vanities that are woven into every life. There are no grand gestures here. Joselito in his review absolutely nailed it when he wrote, “It's an exciting, unputdownable reading frenzy of non-events.” The lasso? Bennett’s deft observations and characterizations. I can’t think of another writer who has captured youth and aging better than he. On youth: “As for them, they marveled at the phenomena presented in Sophia’s person; they admired; they admitted the style of her gown; but they envied neither her innocence nor her beauty; they envied nothing but her youth and the fresh tint of her cheeks.” On aging: “Nothing could destroy the structure of her beauty, but she looked worn and appreciably older.” On acceptance: “The truth was that, though her bereavement had been the cause of a most genuine and durable sorrow, it had been a relief to her. When Constance was over fifty, the energetic and masterful Sophia had burst in upon her lethargic tranquility and very seriously disturbed the flow of old habits. Certainly Constance had fought Sophia on the main point, and won; but on a hundred minor points she had either lost or had not fought. Sophia had been ‘too much’ for Constance, and it had been only by a wearying expenditure of nervous force that Constance had succeeded in holding a small part of her own against the unconscious domination of Sophia. The death of Mrs. Scales had put an end to all the strain, and Constance had been once again mistress in Constance’s house. Constance would never have admitted these facts, even to herself; and no one would ever have dared to suggest them to her. For with all her temperamental mildness she had her formidable side.”Bennett underscores that no life is ever small to the person living it. Think about that for a moment: no life is ever small to the person living it. Annie Lamott once wrote, “I may not be much but I’m all I think about.” Bennett's sentiments exactly. A pitch perfect novel – recommended without reservation.Note: I read the Modern Library edition which shows a date of 1911 but I don't think that's right. The preface was written by Bennett which may not be included in the edition with the introduction by Francine Prose.
What do You think about The Old Wives' Tale (1999)?
THE OLD WIVES’ TALE. (1908). Arnold Bemmett. ****.tI have a pile of books “to be read” that comprise my “guilt” pile. They are usually from the group known as classics, and have small print, and are exceedingly long. I put off reading any of them until my guilt level exceeds my capability of enduring it. That’s how I picked up this novel by Bennett. I’ve known for years that this was considered his best work, and had even broken myself into his style by reading one of shorter works first, now I’ve done. It is the story of two women, sisters, Sophia and Constance. Sophia was the younger. We meet them when they are young teenagers, growing up in their father’s house, attached to his millinary shop. At the time, their mother wants to take them out of school so that they can help in the shop. This was fine with Constance, but definitely not what Sophia wanted in life. The two girls ultimately split apart; Constance staying at home and working at the store, Sophia running off with a travelling salesman, who takes her to Paris. The salesman, Gerald Scales, is a bit of a cad, and tried to get her to France without marrying her, but Sophie had more sense than that. Scales had just inherited twelve-thousand pounds from his family and decided that he didn’t want to go into the family business either. The stories of the two girls diverge from there, and the author follows their lives until they are old women – the old wives of the title. This is a slow-reading book, and gets sentimental at times, but Bennett managed to write a novel in the French Realism style and to do it very well. Today, we have heard all of these stories before, but at the time they were a revelation to the English reading public. This edition contains a foreward by Bennett who explains how he came by the title for the book. It is quite revealing about a writer’s inspiration. Recommended.
—Tony
What did I like about this book? It wasn't really exciting, or novel, nor were the characters that compelling - and yet, it was thoroughly good. The preface helped me to like it, I admit. Bennett writes about seeing two older women in a restaurant and feeling curious about what made them so different and yet brought them to the same place - and wanting for a long time to explore that idea in his writing. So this novel is really focused on the idea that small everyday choices build upon each other and that it is these, more than even the seemingly larger decisions of life, that form our character and even our appearance, and determine where we end up and how. It was this theory that held me throughout the book, and that I could relate to - in fact, I feel as if I have known Constance and Sophia - I have witnessed these kind of lives. And in that sense this book felt contemporary - it is the kind of thing that happens every day. It was about details, about mundane events, and yet, it was not boring or bleak. I respect Bennett's skill to be able to have Constance look at her sister's life and comment that it was largely about nothing (when her own life was equally so, although she took a different path)- to be able to acknowledge that without being overcome by it? Really great writing. Now if only it had been more exciting, I would have given it 5 stars.
—Sylvester
2 sisters, 2 separate lives : "I have been through too much, I cannot stand it." Yes, we're only concerned with our paltry selves, so why do some whine, Why did this novel not mention this or that war or crisis. Why? Cos outside events never matter . In his preface Bennett notes that ordinary people are never aware of history's dramatic events. And talented Cyril, the child of one sis : so cute, so spoiled. At 33, his "habits were industrious as ever. He seldom spoke of his plans and never of his hopes. He was unexceptionable. He imagined that industry was sufficient justification for a life."A classic tale covering 60 years by the underrated Arnold Bennett. I refer GRs to the fine review by Cecily for dets. Bennett's decades-long novel influenced authors like the plodding (and, for me, unreadable) Edna Ferber. It will put a lump in your throat, if you have a throat.
—Sketchbook
