When I saw that Jane Smiley, one of my favorite writers, was reviewing Ronald Frame's novel, "Havisham," several Sundays ago in the New York Times, I was titillated. I did not want to read the review prior to reading the book, and, though Jane's review was mixed, there was no way that I, a confirmed Dickensian, was NOT going to read this novel, no matter how bad it turned out to be. While it was hardly bad, it was hardly good, either; there were things Frame did, which I did not like, and I don't think he was the writer for the project. Ironically, the one who I think is suitable is enjoying a big year, with her novel, "The Goldfinch." Donna Tartt is a true Dickensian, and, had she taken on "Havisham" (though I am sure the project did not interest her; otherwise she would have!!!!!!) it might have been a far better and more interesting book. No, make that it WOULD have.
But before going any further, let me pay tribute to the two--that is right TWO people who can claim ownership to the character of Miss Havisham!
The first is Charles Dickens himself, who first breathed life into her in his immortal (and one of my favorites!) novel, "Great Expectations," first published in 1861. It was his thirteenth published work, so, for him, that proved to be a lucky number! Jane Smiley certainly pays Dickens his due, as she damn well should!
But there is someone whom Miss Smiley conspicuously fails to mention, and must be mentioned, when it comes to the character of Miss Havisham. In referring to it as a role having been assumed over the years since "Great Expectations" has been dramatized on both stage and film, she names a gallery of actresses, who have, indeed portrayed the role, but not the one, the only, the definitive
portrayer of all of this celebrated character--the gifted British actress Martita Hunt! No one has defined this character better except for Dickens, himself. So, it is these two who jointly own Miss Havisham.
None of which has anything to do with Ronald Frame's novel. To begin with, let me clear up a few things right away, which Frame maintains Miss Havisham does, contrasting with readers' prior expectations of her.
Miss Havisham bathes. Some of those closest to me maintain she never did, that she must be a mass of filth, but she is not. And, she has more than one wedding gown; as the first one wears out, she has another made, exactly like it, and so on, and so on. What Frame fails to make sense with, regarding this idea--and it is the first of many flaws--is the passage of time. Miss Havisham, who herself narrates the novel in first person, admits that as time goes on, she, somewhat increases in size, yet she continues the gowns being made tailored to the same size and dimensions as she was on the wedding day. How in the world does she eventually fit into these? Frame never makes this clear.
Most irreparably, he does not clarify her transformation from jilted spinster into bitter recluse. Anyone who reads "Havisham" will have read "Great Expectations;" the interest is built in, so there is a good deal the reader, on coming to Frame's novel, knows, thanks to Dickens. Yes, Miss Havisham is jilted by Charles Compeyson, but while Dickens' work makes it seem as though that morning at eight forty is when everything stopped, at Satis House, Frame has Miss Havisham break down, but emerge from it a strong, confident businesswoman, hell bent on undoing the business damage Compeyson has done, and using this, at first, as balm, to soothe her savage wounds, which, for a time, seem to be soothed.
If I am understanding Frame's story correctly, it less Compeyson who unhinges Miss Havisham, than her betrayal by another. To be sure, Charles Compeyson causes her to turn her back on men, but it is this other betrayal that causes her to turn further against Mankind!!!!!!!!!!!!!
In Frame's novel, Miss Havisham had, during her younger years, a very dear friend, by the name of Sally. I am not sure whether they were of the same social class; I think Sally is a notch below the Havishams, because, once she is sent off to London, it is to apprentice as a servant in some wealthy house. Nevertheless, she and Miss Havisham (whose first name, never mentioned in Dickens, is given as Catherine, on which I disagree. Something more unusual is called for her character; at one point, in researching her, I came across a source that said Miss Havisham's given first name was Aurelia. That seems more in keeping with her, and Frame should have had the sense to keep this idea intact. Alas, he has not!) Anyway, it turns out that Sally eventually marries Compeyson, even though Havisham, and we, the reader, know Compeyson has a history of doing this, that he is a gambler, embezzler, and will come to a bad end. The marriage is certainly not to be a happy one, and, as it turns out, when Miss H learns of her half brother Arthur (the product of a secret liaison with the cook, Mrs. Bundy; her father said they married, but I never believed it for a minute!!!!!!!!!) living with the Compeysons, and of the conspiracy between them all to extract money for her, leading her to be jilted, it is the accumulation of all this, not the jilting itself, that unhinges Miss Havisham, and causes her to, finally and famously, entomb herself in Satis House.
Frame takes far too long to get here. He also spends the last third of the novel rehashing, and trying to internalize "Great Expectations" itself, as if he can do better than Dickens!!!!!!
I mean, come on? Over 150 years, and Dickens' novel is still read--I have done so, at least four times---while Frame's book will be forgotten in six months!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
One thing Frame makes abundantly clear. Despite her outward theatricality, which has drawn actresses (and actors, like I, who would love to) toward playing her, no one should or want to be Miss Havisham. She seemes doomed from the start--her mother dying in birth, her father trying to buy his daughter's way into society with money. No wonder she could not handle the betrayals that befell her. Her upbringing resulted in a person who, when life turned on her, turns inward, against herself.
But it is not worth the trouble of reading Frame's novel to learn this. And I can tell you, Miss Havisham herself would not approve of Frame's novel.
Don't bother with it. That's what you have me for, darlings!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
No comments:
Post a Comment