The Portrait of Isabel Archer
- a new technique and beyond it
Despite the
fact that any piece of criticism should start from the opus and not from an external
concept, with Henry James it is better to do it vice versa. That’s because he
is a pioneer of the 20th century fiction in giving to the novel a
new dimension: the wide field of human consciousness as the center of a novel.
In the preface
to “ The Portrait of a Lady” he makes a full confession of his technique,
namely that of “the point of view”. For Henry James the act of creation begins
with the “vision of some person or persons” and
never consists
in “any conceit of a plot…but
altogether in the sense of a single
character” in this particular case “the character and aspect of a particular
engaging woman”.
Accordingly,
in “The Portrait of a Lady” one can find Aristotle’s well-known concept on art,
namely that the poet(creator) may present not only real things but also
possible ones within the limits of credibility and necessity. With Isabel
Archer, the central consciousness of the novel, the reader becomes aware of the
wide range of choices she is offered, “which among the possibilities, being precisely
the question” says H. James.
Unlike the
omniscient writer, H. James does present Isabel as she discovers the world, and
also with the help of the “reflectors”: Ralph, Mr. And Mrs. Touchett, Lord
Wartburton, Henrietta Stackpole, Caspar Goodwood. Any of these “satellites”
sees the heroine according to his or her capacity of observation. As H. James
tells in the Preface “they are, single or together, as nothing without the
posted presence of the watcher – without in other words, the consciousness of
the artist”.
What happens
in fact from the first pages of the novel is everybody considers Isabel a
superior creature, a gifted young person who deserves a particular destiny. Her
sisters do, her aunt, her cousin.
Whether she is
or not superior this is to be revealed gradually. What is obvious from the very
beginning is the fact that Isabel Archer is basically good; moreover she is
pure. One of H. James’s themes was that of the pure innocent American
victimized by Europe, Europe that beyond the grandeur of its civilization has a
rotten morality.
Hence, what
takes place in the pages of the novel can be called a gradual process of change
of the pure innocent American young lady Isabel Archer. Isabel, the central
consciousness grows, develops as she is revealed through several “reflectors”.
The point of
view has thus a philosophical and a technical implication.
The
philosophical one is that of the various possibilities in which life as well as
everything in the Universe can be shaped: the technical implication refers to
the impersonality of the author.
Each
“reflector” comes on the stage to cast a different light upon the central
consciousness and that according to his or her capacity of reflection; thus
becoming flat or episodic like Isabel’s sisters or, on the contrary, steady
company in the heroine’s “adventure” like Henrietta. This enables one to group
them in a few pairs. Lord Wartburton’s sisters as well as Isabel’s sisters are
definitely flat characters. One can hardly remember their name before finishing
reading the novel.
Next comes
Isabel’s aunt, Mrs. Touchett, an eccentric lady, quite odd in her manners and
ideas. A similar eccentricity demonstrates Countess Gemini, yet with a touch of vulgarity.
Lord
Wartburton is the perfect English gentleman, a man of fortune who has got
everything in life except love. He seems to have no pair in the novel, yet he
has: old Mr. Touchett, a venerable figure, an idealization of the wealthy
astute accomplished American banker who also knew love’s deception.
Here comes the
most steadfast couple in the book, Henrietta Stackpole and Caspar Goodwood; the
true friend and the insistent suitor of Isabel’s. And so on, Pansy and Rosier,
sensitive, fragile like petals;
Mme Merle and
Gilbert Osmond, the diabolic couple, they come on the stage in pairs. The
dramatic method works all right. They al seem moving just like in a
performance; Isabel call it somewhere in the book a comedy or a tragedy. In
fact is a dumb show; they all speak but cannot talk. There is no communication
between them, as well as between Isabel and the others. Each and everyone
thinks she or he understands her, yet they are all mistaken. The problem is
they cannot grasp that Isabel is a regular person, an average American young
lady; none of them treats her as such. They all believe she is on her path
straight to perfection and refuse to accept her losing direction. They refuse
considering her a human being, they cannot accept that she may fail. Perhaps
one person in the book detects exactly her nature, Mr. Touchett: “She’ll hardly
fall a victim to more than one”.
Isabel Archer
is not a special person. If there is something special about her this lies in
her desire of perfection, in her “inflated ideals” quite uncommon in a young
lady.
She strikes,
at first, for the freedom of her mind. That doesn’t mean her mind is remarkable
or she is not capable of mistakes. She is all right. The problem is that she
cannot admit it:” I can’t publish my mistake”. She is doing her best to live
according to her model – a perfect ideal one.
At a certain
moment in the novel the world seems too small to Isabel. Why? That’s because
she seeks for external liberty; she cannot grasp that since the world seems
small to you that is the mind which is narrowing it is bound by social
conventions, prejudice, a dangerous morality.
When one has
the wide field of the imagination free then a single room is enough for living.
There is
enough discrepancy between what Isabel thinks life to be and what life really
is.
Isabel’s
paramount desire is to see people, places, know ever more every day, to watch
life as a panorama, from outside, to contemplate it, now and then adopt a
critical attitude but only as a playgoer, everything at the level of a stage
performance.
“I don’t wish
to touch the cup of experience. It’s a poisoned drink! I only want to see for
myself”.
And Ralph’s
answer is : “You want to see but not to feel”.
That’s in fact
the truth about Isabel. She cannot choose being a player. She likes to think
life is a pleasant adventure, and traveling seems to her being the way one gets
information on life and living.
She cannot get
any further into the meaning of real life because she doesn’t care but for
great remarkable things, deeds, ideas, people, events, places. Anything lacking
in importance, greatness, fame, superiority does not make the object of her
interest. Here lies the cause for her failure: in her rejection of the bad
bitter dull side of life, that is of real life. That’s how, I would say , her
failure a quixotesque one: she rejects
the earthly truth for the illusion of the pure intangible ideal one. She is
thus deluded by appearances. Yet, she will never admit it, even when she is
perfectly aware of it.
Let’s discuss,
for instance, the issue of her marriage. First of all, what does marriage mean
to her? We don’t know. Neither she does. Of course, she has some great ideas
about marriage as about everything else. She opposes marriage to her ideas of
freedom and independence. Isabel wants to postpone it and enjoy her freedom to
travel all over the world by herself. That’s why she rejects Caspar Goodwood,
Lord Wartburton, and even Osmond. Why in the world does she come back to marry
the most insignificant one, as she call him “a perfect nonentity”? This has
nothing to do with her theories but with something else. Isabel is everything
but strong. Unfortunately, she will discover it too late.
Till then she
likes to believe herself an independent person, and as such the very
confirmation of it coming from a refined person as Mme Merle could make her but
a wretched puppet. From that moment, Isabel doesn’t belong to herself any
longer. Psychologically she belongs to the odious couple of Mme Merle and
Gilbert Osmond. She is confused in their tangle, spellbound and vulnerable. It
is Mme merle who enchanted Isabel with her “song” - the song of the merle –
pouring sweetness in each word, each gesture, each move. Let’s read an fragment
from her talk with Osmond:
(Osmond)
“Isn’t she meant for something better than that?” (marrying him)
(Mme Merle)”I
don’t pretend to know what people are meant for. I only know what I can do with
them.”
It is
interesting to find out what Osmond means to Isabel. Again she fails in
detecting his character, as she has done with her own character and also with
Mme Merle’s. She fall in love with her image of Osmond. Yet immediately after marrying him she learns the
truth; she realizes he is but a simulacrum of perfection. However she remains a
captive. She does not attempt to escape the cage, not even rebel. Why since she
does not love him? She has to admit it to Henrietta: ”No, I don’t like him”.
So, what is
it? She is still under the same spell. Osmond has a strong influence upon her
but she is not yet aware of it. Isabel lost her independence; she is doing her
best to please him, to be a good wife, to share his opinions, to adopt his
views. She feels that doesn’t work, yet she is confident, and finally she
succeeds but still ignoring it.
In chapter 47
she voices his theory, yet she is unaware of it. A theory which she never heard
from his lips, yet every moment, every day has been inculcated by him in his special way of persuade, of taking
control of somebody’s mind.
“One must
accept one’s deeds. I married him before all the world; I was perfectly free;
it was impossible to do anything more deliberate. One can’t change that way.”
This is what
Isabel tells Henrietta in chapter 47. Now let’s take a look at chapter 51 where
a similar theory if not the same is voiced by Osmond:
“I take our
marriage seriously…It may be a disagreeable proximity; it’s one, at any rate,
of our deliberately making… Because I think we should accept the consequences
of our actions, and what I value most in life is the honour of a thing.”
After this
confrontation Isabel realizes she is but a subject of his terrible authority.
All the time she has kept repeating to herself: “I’m afraid, yes. I’m afraid”.
She cannot say for sure whom is she afraid of, or perhaps no one or nothing in
particular, yet everyone and everything. When Countess Gemini asks her in a
harsh tone:
“Why else are
you rich and clever and good?” she answers promptly: “Why indeed, I feel
stupidly weak”.
Despite her
weakness Isabel rebels. Or maybe it is exactly the awareness of her weakness
which makes protest. And she does so by leaving for Gardencourt to see Ralph on
his death bed.
Actually, what
truly determines her take such a resolute step? I would say that for the first
time in her life feeling is stronger than reason. Now she realizes how much
Ralph has loved her, and for the first time she is touched by a man’s love for
her. She regrets immensely her
selfishness, her pride, her foolishness
in hiding her weakness as a woman. Her capacity of devotion has been mislead. In
her last confession to Ralph she knows he had deserved all her gratitude. Their
confessions on his death bed relieve her, have a strong effect upon her. By
taking the liberty of seeing her cousin, Isabel, in fact, starts a new stage of
her life: she regains hope and self confidence.
“Deep in her
soul – deeper than any appetite for renunciation was the sense that life would
be her business for a long time to come. And at moments there was something
inspiring, almost enlivening in the conviction. It was a proof of strength – it
was a proof she would be some day happy again”. (Ch. 53)
©Elena
Malec, Bucharest, March 1978. All rights reserved.