Ivy Compton-Burnett, Manservant and Maidservant (1947)
Am I tired of Angela Carter? Hardly, but it seemed wise to vary my reading a little to ensure that I don't become so. More Carter sooner rather than later, for sure.
Ivy Compton-Burnett wrote twenty
novels, and all of them (or at least, all but her first, published at
seventeen, which she later disavowed) seem to concern dysfunctional,
upper-class, late-Victorian households. For some variety, some of
them may actually be Edwardian. They're all--I am told--stylized in
the same way, and they tend to have very similar titles; eg,
Brothers and Sisters, Men and Wives, Daughters and Sons,
Parents and Children, Mother and Son. Admittedly, it's
hard to imagine wanting to read all of these, but
if they're good, there's certainly an appeal to an artist who works
on a very constrained canvas. Compton-Burnett may not be
super-well-known these days, but she was very highly-thought-of, with
a vehement fanbase, in her time.
Manservant and Maidservant
concerns the Lambs: the father, Horace; his aunt, Emilia; his cousin,
Mortimer; his wife, Charlotte; and their five children (ages seven to
thirteen), Avery, Tamasin, Marcus, Jasper, and Sarah. The crux of
the biscuit is that Horace is an awful tyrant: miserly, emotionally
abusive, and super-passive-aggressive, all cloaked
in a pious air of constant martyrdom. His children hate and fear
him, and Charlotte and Mortimer are planning to take them and run off
together. BUT THEN, all of a sudden, with no warning, he stops being
a jerk and starts being unaccountably good to everyone, especially
the children, which naturally destabilizes everything. Why has this
happened? What does it mean? Is it a real change?
Oh yeah, and given the title, I should
also mention the servants: Bullivant, the butler; Mrs. Selden, the
cook; George, the footman; and Miriam, the maid (the impulse to
picture them as equivalent characters from Downton Abbey is
overwhelming but generally inappropriate, though Bullivant may well
look--though not act--a lot like Carson). They have their own role
and their own dramas, but they're certainly not the focus of the
novel, and the title doesn't seem terribly apposite.
You're not going to get an idea of
Compton-Burnett, however, if you don't know how
it's written. As it happens, though she isn't allergic to
descriptions and stage directions, the vast bulk of the novel (and
all her novels, I am given to believe) is dialogue (I was sometimes
reminded of William Gaddis' J.R., though C-B is
certainly less self-consciously abstruse). Not only that, but it's
extremely stylized dialogue: everyone, be they
upper-class adults, children, or servants, talks in a very similar,
elegantly sophisticated way that would likely pose a lot of problems
to even an advanced ESL student. But that's not all. What
really makes this book stand out--to me--is how
people talk about things. Boy, how vague a description is
that? To be specific, there's no subtext or
things-left-unsaid here. Sure, people keep secrets and deceive each
other, but if there's something to say, they will say
it. So, for instance, when they realize that Horace has had this
change of heart and therefore it wouldn't be right to take the
children away, Charlotte and Mortimer will totally
tell him, "hey, we were going to run off together and take your
kids 'cause you were such a jerk, but now that you're being less of a
jerk, that's clearly off the table." I have...never seen
anything quite like it.
SO DOES ALL THIS WORK? Well, it does
for me. I found it gripping, and Compton-Burnett
has an appealing dry wit, which really helps. The ending, which
doesn't feel super-conclusive, definitely leaves one with a lot to
think about re these tangled issues of whether this kind of sudden
repentance is really feasible; and the influence that the past
retains over people, whether or not things have--allegedly--changed.
I'll tell you, though, if you look at reader reviews on places like
goodreads, you will see that people who don't like C-B really
fucking hate her, and the main reason for this hatred is this very
stylization which to me makes the book interesting. PEOPLE DON'T
TALK LIKE THAT!!!!111 Fair enough; I can see how it wouldn't be for
everyone. But a lot of these reviews also seem to be under the
impression that there's such a thing as a novel that's not
stylized--that, somehow, there's an objectively normal or correct way
of depicting a world in words. To which I say: PSHAW! Is this
related to the popular belief that the only people who somehow don't
have accents are the ones who talk like I do?
Anyway, I liked Manservant and
Maidservant a lot. It certainly fulfilled my central
artistic criterion: it gave me a new kind of aesthetic experience.
I'm not likely to try to devour Compton-Burnett's entire oeuvre, but
I would not put it past myself to read another
book or two of hers at some point.