Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.92 AVERAGE
3.92 AVERAGE
I love it when a novel redeems itself in the last few pages. I didn’t think very much of this one until the end: it is well written throughout, but it drags a little. But then - that ending! That perfect ending! I felt so much for Lily’s despair and think that Wharton ended the novel beautifully.
Names have been used for eons, though not always; there was a time in history when there was no linguistic need for personal names. In the modern world though, names are essential to to individual. While most people have a vague idea what their own name means, few give it much thought. Many parents will carefully select names with meaning for their children, either rooted in family tradition or bourne of carefully considered meaning. Authors treat their works similarly, putting much thought into choosing names of characters, in the hopes of expressing traits or habits of the character by deciding on a name that epitomizes that character themselves.
The study of names is called onomastics, a field which touches on linguistics, history, anthropology, psychology, sociology, philology and much more. When referring to the "meaning of a name" however, they are most likely referring to the etymology, which is the original literal meaning. The Oxford English Dictionary defines etymology as “the study of the origin of words and the way in which their meanings have changed throughout history”.
The development of character identity is essential to understanding individual motive; It has been suggested that, often, authors will select names for characters that will reflect actual traits of or decisions made by the character themselves. This not only adds meaning to the work of literature but adds an element of realism to the characters.
Names are universal in human language; according to Alego, proper names were the “original kind of word, due to an uncritical acceptance of a romantic view of the savage as a simple, uncomplex soul, given to concrete thinking [...]” (11, Alego). At one time anthropologists thought that certain peoples were so "primitive and unorganized” (Feldman) that they didn't even use names. However, as time passed and cultures evolved, language was created in order to prescribe meaning to the world around us. As names eventually became a standard way to identify ourselves and others, names have been passed down through family lineage as a form of respect for the individuals who have bore the name; but in writing there is no lineage to base characters on. In literature, it is the authors’ responsibility to craft a name worthy of the character they have brought to life. In literature, a name can mean everything.
The historical debate between naturalists, who see the name as revelatory of the thing named, and conventionalists, who believe the name as an arbitrary designation, has continued through the centuries and is still very much alive today. Alego has suggested names to be “without signification” (53, Alego), meaningless marks by which one thing is distinguished from another. On the other hand, Alego also purports that it would be “contrary to man’s nature to name the objects of his thoughts by sounds which conveyed no meaning to him or others” (58, Alego). In this regard, it can be maintained that, if only based on the meaning within man’s own mind, there is still meaning behind the selection of names, either for people or for things.
It has been suggested by Shook that “some names resulted from considerable thought, while others came about in a more casual fashion” (xi, Shook). While some names are chosen deliberately and with much fanfare, others come about almost by accident. In an essay written by Cather, she asserts that the writer “accepts, rather than chooses” the theme of material, suggesting that one will instinctively choose character names rather than purposefully. But, even when naming is in some sense “instinctual” (11, Alego), there is no reason to expect we can ever identify the “instinct” that underlies it. Feeling can be reason enough to capture and create valuable meaning.
It is implied that “names simply refer to their referents [...] indirectly, by specifying a condition which their referent uniquely satisfies.” (1, Hughes). For example, in Edith Wharton’s House of Mirth, character Lily Bart throughout the novel embodies a physical appearance comparable to the lily flower as well as a countenance that parallels the traditional meaning of the lily flower. The Lily flower has for centuries been a symbol of innocence, purity, and beauty, dating back to the Victorian language of flowers. In the novel, Lily is "naturally fitted to dominate any situation in which she [finds] herself" (Wharton, 69). This adaptability is a key part of her; Wharton writes that Lily is “a pliable substance [that] is less easy to break than a stiff one," and "inwardly as malleable as wax" (Wharton). Wharton is right to point out that Lily's floral adaptability can also be read as fickleness, which explains why she "works like a slave preparing the ground and sowing her seed; but the day she ought to be reaping the harvest she over-sleeps herself or goes off on a picnic" (Wharton). Like the character Percy's rare Americana, and like the flower, Lily, too, is a rare object to be collected, admired, and publicly displayed. Every man in the novel – even Selden – at one point or another views her as a nice decoration for his social mantelpiece. As early on as the first line, Lily realizes that she is "no more account among [her social circle] than an expensive toy in the hands of a spoiled child" (Wharton). Even at the end of the novel, when Simon has morphed into a likeable, kind man, he still offers to save Lily on account of her value as an object, akin to a delicate flower. Throughout the entire novel there are parallels to be drawn between the Lily flower and the character of Lily herself, indicating that Wharton purposefully chose such a name and deliberately wrote the character as an extension of the flower itself.
The study of names is called onomastics, a field which touches on linguistics, history, anthropology, psychology, sociology, philology and much more. When referring to the "meaning of a name" however, they are most likely referring to the etymology, which is the original literal meaning. The Oxford English Dictionary defines etymology as “the study of the origin of words and the way in which their meanings have changed throughout history”.
The development of character identity is essential to understanding individual motive; It has been suggested that, often, authors will select names for characters that will reflect actual traits of or decisions made by the character themselves. This not only adds meaning to the work of literature but adds an element of realism to the characters.
Names are universal in human language; according to Alego, proper names were the “original kind of word, due to an uncritical acceptance of a romantic view of the savage as a simple, uncomplex soul, given to concrete thinking [...]” (11, Alego). At one time anthropologists thought that certain peoples were so "primitive and unorganized” (Feldman) that they didn't even use names. However, as time passed and cultures evolved, language was created in order to prescribe meaning to the world around us. As names eventually became a standard way to identify ourselves and others, names have been passed down through family lineage as a form of respect for the individuals who have bore the name; but in writing there is no lineage to base characters on. In literature, it is the authors’ responsibility to craft a name worthy of the character they have brought to life. In literature, a name can mean everything.
The historical debate between naturalists, who see the name as revelatory of the thing named, and conventionalists, who believe the name as an arbitrary designation, has continued through the centuries and is still very much alive today. Alego has suggested names to be “without signification” (53, Alego), meaningless marks by which one thing is distinguished from another. On the other hand, Alego also purports that it would be “contrary to man’s nature to name the objects of his thoughts by sounds which conveyed no meaning to him or others” (58, Alego). In this regard, it can be maintained that, if only based on the meaning within man’s own mind, there is still meaning behind the selection of names, either for people or for things.
It has been suggested by Shook that “some names resulted from considerable thought, while others came about in a more casual fashion” (xi, Shook). While some names are chosen deliberately and with much fanfare, others come about almost by accident. In an essay written by Cather, she asserts that the writer “accepts, rather than chooses” the theme of material, suggesting that one will instinctively choose character names rather than purposefully. But, even when naming is in some sense “instinctual” (11, Alego), there is no reason to expect we can ever identify the “instinct” that underlies it. Feeling can be reason enough to capture and create valuable meaning.
It is implied that “names simply refer to their referents [...] indirectly, by specifying a condition which their referent uniquely satisfies.” (1, Hughes). For example, in Edith Wharton’s House of Mirth, character Lily Bart throughout the novel embodies a physical appearance comparable to the lily flower as well as a countenance that parallels the traditional meaning of the lily flower. The Lily flower has for centuries been a symbol of innocence, purity, and beauty, dating back to the Victorian language of flowers. In the novel, Lily is "naturally fitted to dominate any situation in which she [finds] herself" (Wharton, 69). This adaptability is a key part of her; Wharton writes that Lily is “a pliable substance [that] is less easy to break than a stiff one," and "inwardly as malleable as wax" (Wharton). Wharton is right to point out that Lily's floral adaptability can also be read as fickleness, which explains why she "works like a slave preparing the ground and sowing her seed; but the day she ought to be reaping the harvest she over-sleeps herself or goes off on a picnic" (Wharton). Like the character Percy's rare Americana, and like the flower, Lily, too, is a rare object to be collected, admired, and publicly displayed. Every man in the novel – even Selden – at one point or another views her as a nice decoration for his social mantelpiece. As early on as the first line, Lily realizes that she is "no more account among [her social circle] than an expensive toy in the hands of a spoiled child" (Wharton). Even at the end of the novel, when Simon has morphed into a likeable, kind man, he still offers to save Lily on account of her value as an object, akin to a delicate flower. Throughout the entire novel there are parallels to be drawn between the Lily flower and the character of Lily herself, indicating that Wharton purposefully chose such a name and deliberately wrote the character as an extension of the flower itself.
Someone in book club said, ‘80 pages in, it starts getting good.’ True, it took a long time to grab me and for me to understand what was going on. Loved the writing later, rather than early. A view into privilege and wealth. I thought the view of the time period was well written. Some women were conniving, lest another woman took their ‘place’ or didn’t deserve a position — according to them. It was sad. She was an orphan, without guidance. No parents or even extended family to help guide Lili. While she seemed to be smart and willing to try new viewpoints, she also had low self-esteem, despite her obvious beauty and feeling like she’d been born for just one purpose - to marry and be wealthy. She and Selden were a disconnect in every sense of the word, despite the fact that they loved each other very much. Mars versus Venus. I hate that no one, except Lili took responsibility for their misdeeds; that was pretty pathetic. But at the same time, you have to grow some of those skills yourself; with family that supports you and good friends, even in 1905. Yes, I get it...life was different then. One thing I really enjoyed was the timeline, in the front of the book that showed all the technology and mechanical advances during Wharton’s life and politics in play during that time - that was fascinating. Highly recommended. Maybe even a 5❣️
I really enjoyed this book. I was sucked into the story almost immediately, and I felt like there was so much going on here...lots to think about! Lily Bart was such a complex character, and of course a very tragic one at that. I couldn't help thinking how she would have fared today. Though she was often an unsympathetic character, it was difficult to not feel that she was a victim of society, and that she had very few alternatives to the choices she made.
Oh! What a heartbreakingly sad story 😥 will think about this for awhile and I’m hoping to find a movie adaptation to watch, Glad I read it, but I’m now in great need of a sweet, happy tale! #litsyclassics #MountTBR
I listened to this tale and absolutely reveled in the incredible vocabulary and detail throughout. Edith Wharton absolutely deserves to be read. I will get her on my TBR list in book rather than audible form.
This was our book club book this month. It is a critical look at the way a woman must behave in the New York society of the period and gave us a great hour of discussion.
Everyone acknowledged the skill of the writing, with characters and settings being rendered beautifully, but not everyone enjoyed reading it.
Our members gave it 6/5/3/8/5/5/7/7
Everyone acknowledged the skill of the writing, with characters and settings being rendered beautifully, but not everyone enjoyed reading it.
Our members gave it 6/5/3/8/5/5/7/7
Misery porn.
Lily Bart was born to live beyond her means. An orphan living under the care of her wealthy aunt, Lily flits from social gathering to weekend party, seeking a permanent solution to her budgetary problems. Only, it seems Lily is her own worst enemy when it comes to marrying for money.
Edith Wharton is a damn sadist. Every possible means by which Lily could have been saved is examined, given enough space for us to begin to have hope, then systematically crushed. Is Lily supposed to be Jesus? Did she die for our sins? I don't know, and I don't really care. Why the hell was this entitled, "House of Mirth?"
Lily Bart was born to live beyond her means. An orphan living under the care of her wealthy aunt, Lily flits from social gathering to weekend party, seeking a permanent solution to her budgetary problems. Only, it seems Lily is her own worst enemy when it comes to marrying for money.
Edith Wharton is a damn sadist. Every possible means by which Lily could have been saved is examined, given enough space for us to begin to have hope, then systematically crushed. Is Lily supposed to be Jesus? Did she die for our sins? I don't know, and I don't really care. Why the hell was this entitled, "House of Mirth?"
Reading this... Last week was hard for me (in my personal life) and I believe this book was hard to read for me because most of the times I felt like Lily. I find her one of the best characters in terms of how resembling to a real person she seems. Edith Wharton has a way to make sure you'll end up with your heart broken after finishing one of her novels. However, I'm not sure if it took me so long to read because I felt a lot of characters were irrelevant, or I didn't enjoy so much information which I didn't care about or if I just couldn't fully enjoy this story because I felt too immerse in it and because my own life was being hard for me. I still will give it 5 stars because it's a beautiful, capturing, heartbreaking novel filled with humanity, the ugly and the pretty, and so real.