3.0

Well... What can I say? First, I acknowledge the skill of Henry James as a writer. I think it’s fair to call him one of the greats. He is a master portrait painter in his writing: scenic, but leaving much of the interpretation to the reader. That said, his subject world I find tedious and even boring, as well as very predictable. You read one Victorian novel, you’ve read them all. The tragic reality of life for aristocratic women during this period is well-trod ground. But one can’t help but feel there was much more agency available to such women than is often portrayed. And this makes Isabel Archer’s seemingly hopeless and conscribed reality seem silly. Just walk away, dammit! It can’t be that hard! And the salon intrigue seems so petty. But it is what it is. One thing I can’t quite gather is what about Osmond made Isabel come to despise and hate him that she didn’t know before she hitched her wagon to the dude? Madame Merle was more of a tragic figure than Isabel. What drove Madame Merle to be so deceptive and manipulative was born of an oppression that I thought made her an empathetic character in the end. And, really, they guys were all kinda both jerkish and impotent at the same time. Anyway, I acknowledge the exceptional quality of Henry James in the craft of writing, but I’m not a big fan of the genre and the subjects he writes about.