Scan barcode
A review by courtneydoss
The Infernal World of Branwell Bronte by Daphne du Maurier
4.0
Daphne du Maurier is one of my top five favorite authors and considering that the Brontes have become, in a word, an obsession this last month, reading her attempt at a biography about the least appreciated member of Patrick and Maria's brood was high on my priority list. I went into this book knowing that it would be flawed. Du Maurier was, above all, a novelist and there was likely to be a lot of jumping to conclusions (spoiler alert: there was).
Du Maurier also wrote this book in 1961 and the access that she had to information about the time period was limited by what books, artifacts, and experts she could get her hands on. Modern biographies have the benefit of the internet, and each other, to help compile multiple pieces of evidence to support particular theories regarding the Bronte siblings, such as why Branwell was released from his position with the Robinsons and whether or not Anne Bronte was in love with the charming clergyman William Weightman. Perspectives of the time period the books are written in also color interpretations of presented facts, such as a modern biography positing that Charlotte Bronte was bisexual although unlikely to be aware of her own sexuality. No earlier biographer would have dared bring forward such a theory. They were just gals being pals.
Lastly, the personality of the biographer colors the information quite a bit. Some biographers really like Charlotte, and so place her on this pedestal as a passionate, intelligent woman suppressed by her time. Others, who find Charlotte less likable, will portray her as a crabby, jealous and bossy. The truth, as always, is usually somewhere between the two extremes. The Infernal World of Branwell Bronte is not immune to this. Daphne du Maurier puts a lot of herself in this book, interpreting Charlotte's interest in writing from a male perspective as indicative of a dual nature, like she herself had in her writing, rather than an imitative choice based upon all of the works that Charlotte admired. She interprets the Bronte family as writers in the same way that she views herself as a writer, failing to take into account the differences in style, personality, and environment.
Regardless of any flaws in the makeup of this biography, it has merit. It is an intensely compassionate retelling of the life of a troubled young man who history has maligned. Raised as the golden child by his father, Branwell suffered from what a modern person might call "gifted kid syndrome". The constant ego stroking of childhood, where accomplishments beyond one's age are viewed as extraordinary, combined with the seemingly abrupt plateau of skill in adulthood can breed confusion, anger, and anxiety. Branwell Bronte was depressed and angry a lot in his life, frustrated by the lack of recognition for what he believed were incredible works of poetry. His letters to publishers, while amusing to read, show someone who was begging for validation, assured of his own talents and praying that someone else would see it.
Combining this failure to live up to his own expectations with an eventual addiction to alcohol and laudanum, Branwell Bronte was not always a likable person in his life. His sister Charlotte, with whom he shared an entire imaginary world and years of childhood happiness, found him to be pitiful in his final years. The woman he loved rejected him, every attempt he made to earn a living resulted in rejection or dismissal, and his family had come to view him as a burden. The tragedy of it all is that Branwell was actually talented. His poetry was good. His extensive stories of Angria with his sister Charlotte were fun and could have been reworked into something as popular as Jane Eyre. He had the potential, but it died with him.
An interesting difference between this particular biography and others that I have read is the theory that the historical figures about which du Maurier is writing might not be correct in their perspectives. Du Maurier posits that Branwell's love for Lady Robinson was unreturned and largely in his head. She theorizes that Branwell and his sister Charlotte were so entranced by their fictional world that they viewed the entire of reality through the lens of fiction, interpreting illicit plots in everyday occurrences. While I don't know that I would go so far as to agree with du Maurier in this, I do think that it is an interesting idea to bring up. How much of the Brontes' perceptions were accurate? How much of their perceptions were flawed by internal bias or insecurities?
Overall, I think that this book was an incredibly moving ode to the least appreciated Bronte. I appreciated the way du Maurier handled the facts of Branwell's life, displaying him in all his troubled glory, but also taking care to show compassion in her portrayal. I had some issues with her conclusions, particularly those with no evidentiary merit. But overall, I felt that du Maurier's affection for the whole Bronte family was felt in this book.
Du Maurier also wrote this book in 1961 and the access that she had to information about the time period was limited by what books, artifacts, and experts she could get her hands on. Modern biographies have the benefit of the internet, and each other, to help compile multiple pieces of evidence to support particular theories regarding the Bronte siblings, such as why Branwell was released from his position with the Robinsons and whether or not Anne Bronte was in love with the charming clergyman William Weightman. Perspectives of the time period the books are written in also color interpretations of presented facts, such as a modern biography positing that Charlotte Bronte was bisexual although unlikely to be aware of her own sexuality. No earlier biographer would have dared bring forward such a theory. They were just gals being pals.
Lastly, the personality of the biographer colors the information quite a bit. Some biographers really like Charlotte, and so place her on this pedestal as a passionate, intelligent woman suppressed by her time. Others, who find Charlotte less likable, will portray her as a crabby, jealous and bossy. The truth, as always, is usually somewhere between the two extremes. The Infernal World of Branwell Bronte is not immune to this. Daphne du Maurier puts a lot of herself in this book, interpreting Charlotte's interest in writing from a male perspective as indicative of a dual nature, like she herself had in her writing, rather than an imitative choice based upon all of the works that Charlotte admired. She interprets the Bronte family as writers in the same way that she views herself as a writer, failing to take into account the differences in style, personality, and environment.
Regardless of any flaws in the makeup of this biography, it has merit. It is an intensely compassionate retelling of the life of a troubled young man who history has maligned. Raised as the golden child by his father, Branwell suffered from what a modern person might call "gifted kid syndrome". The constant ego stroking of childhood, where accomplishments beyond one's age are viewed as extraordinary, combined with the seemingly abrupt plateau of skill in adulthood can breed confusion, anger, and anxiety. Branwell Bronte was depressed and angry a lot in his life, frustrated by the lack of recognition for what he believed were incredible works of poetry. His letters to publishers, while amusing to read, show someone who was begging for validation, assured of his own talents and praying that someone else would see it.
Combining this failure to live up to his own expectations with an eventual addiction to alcohol and laudanum, Branwell Bronte was not always a likable person in his life. His sister Charlotte, with whom he shared an entire imaginary world and years of childhood happiness, found him to be pitiful in his final years. The woman he loved rejected him, every attempt he made to earn a living resulted in rejection or dismissal, and his family had come to view him as a burden. The tragedy of it all is that Branwell was actually talented. His poetry was good. His extensive stories of Angria with his sister Charlotte were fun and could have been reworked into something as popular as Jane Eyre. He had the potential, but it died with him.
An interesting difference between this particular biography and others that I have read is the theory that the historical figures about which du Maurier is writing might not be correct in their perspectives. Du Maurier posits that Branwell's love for Lady Robinson was unreturned and largely in his head. She theorizes that Branwell and his sister Charlotte were so entranced by their fictional world that they viewed the entire of reality through the lens of fiction, interpreting illicit plots in everyday occurrences. While I don't know that I would go so far as to agree with du Maurier in this, I do think that it is an interesting idea to bring up. How much of the Brontes' perceptions were accurate? How much of their perceptions were flawed by internal bias or insecurities?
Overall, I think that this book was an incredibly moving ode to the least appreciated Bronte. I appreciated the way du Maurier handled the facts of Branwell's life, displaying him in all his troubled glory, but also taking care to show compassion in her portrayal. I had some issues with her conclusions, particularly those with no evidentiary merit. But overall, I felt that du Maurier's affection for the whole Bronte family was felt in this book.