Such astute but also such narrowly
circumscribed psychological observation in the novels of Henry James… This
wealth of noticing: it enlightens, of course, but—like a richly furnished
Victorian drawing room—also casts a slightly oppressive spell. It imprisons the
reader in the demanding self-discipline that patrician social entanglements
call for: that airless clutter of words and objects, of places and ritual
gestures, which conjure the protective husk of gentility into existence.
The trick is always the same: to dramatize
the impermeable mystery of other selves. No matter how finely one might explore
the coiled springs of personality, and articulate the psychological pattern of
any given character, even one suspended in our own familiar and culturally legible
social medium, something never fails
to escape the noticer: characters are in some crucial measure opaque to
themselves and to each other—and in the end, prove scarcely less enigmatic to
the putatively omniscient narrator or, for that matter, to the reader this disembodied,
urbane, elucidative voice addresses.
James never quite took people to be windowless
Leibnitzian monads, but, in his conception, while the curious and the
perceptive may on occasion glimpse some of the furniture within, or spy a few
of the pictures hanging on the walls—and perhaps, with enough patience, even work
out the whole interior configuration of the stately abodes where the soul of each
new acquaintance dwells in guarded concealment—yet his intimate conviction was
that at the very heart of them one would always encounter a secret room, locked
off and heavily curtained. It seems that ultimate existential truths must, alas,
defy expression; and, even in the event that the words could be found to give voice to such indelicate gospel, still good taste
and decorum would surely require it be withheld.
William James, the famous psychologist and
Henry’s older brother, was fascinated with that other word-resistant truth: the
mystical experience. But whereas mysticism fails to find adequate expression because
it overruns the boundaries of ordinary experience and exceeds the very
capacities of language, what the younger James points to in his stories is, to
the contrary, an ineffable absence—an
unanswerable enigma at the center of each life.
We are all strangers sending embassies to
one another across the chasm of our separateness; we struggle to decipher mysterious
signs flashing from foreign shores. Not for nothing is his greatest, his most
perfect, his most exemplary novel called “The Ambassadors.”
The key insight of Sigmund Freud, a
contemporary of James, was his conception of the unconscious as a positive force: that it is the hidden
center which actively determines the choices we make—the savage heart of
darkness where the conflicts that shape us into who we are arise and play
themselves out. For James however, the unconscious remained merely a kind of inaccessible
backstage to the business of social performance; a negatively defined vantage
point from which the uncertain, ambivalent, divided self could begin to gather
itself sufficiently to desire freedom, and thereby set in motion the striving that
would lead (or not) to its emancipation. James did recognise that intractable,
carnally embodied factors of yearning and appetite, of fear and aversion could
underlie even our most polished refinements—but unlike Freud, he preferred to let
these animal depths tarry undeclared, sealed under a finely expressive but also
mystifying surface of convention.
No comments:
Post a Comment