My middle child picked up this skinny novel for me at a used bookstore last week, thinking it would be a perfect addition to my 1930s reading project. It doesn't qualify; the publication date is 1941, but how exciting is it that a 16-year-old recognized a book as being from that particular time period?
Regardless, I went ahead and read this short novel on our flight home this week and I was totally and completely captured by the story. But, before I share my very short reading response, I really, really need to take a moment to gripe about something.
When I was a teenager, I was captivated by the literature that came, specifically, out of the 1930s and 1940s. I think I could accurately describe myself as “cutting my teeth” on this work, before I headed off to college to dedicate my professional life to writing and literary criticism. The authors, from this particular time period, were, essentially, my favorites of all time.
When I set out to do this 1930s reading project, I intentionally committed myself to reading as many books, as possible, that were new to me. This project wasn't about rereads; this was a new challenge, to perceive the work from this decade in a fresh way (though I have included a few rereads).
It has been a meaningful project, thus far, but I do want to contribute this: the flippant and casual abuse of the women in these stories has been absolutely staggering to me.
The female characters are not only casually slapped and backhanded, they are also casually raped AND gang-raped in many of these stories.
Am I referring, in this moment, to plot points? Am I referring to the violence AS the story? No, I am not. That is the most disturbing part. I am referring to a pervasive, consistent and casual violence on women as a background aspect to these stories. Meaning: this isn't a case of authors depicting their characters in this way, to represent the culture of the time (as writers like Larry McMurtry would later depict rampant abuse on women in the state of Texas—abuse he clearly abhorred and was surrounded by, as a youth).
The violence on women, in stories like Maugham's UP AT THE VILLA, is so casual, it's easy to induce stomachaches, just by reading it.
On page 60 of this famous novella, our hysterical, beautiful protagonist, Mary, cries when she is overwrought by an unexpected violent act on a local man. Her male companion (and eager suitor), “Rowley” sees her crying and “he swung his arm and gave her a sharp, stinging slap on the face; she was so startled that she sprang to her feet with a gasp and stopped crying as quickly as she had begun.”
Later in the story, page 93, Mary reflects on Rowley's “slap:”
It was the sexual jealousy of the male, baulked in his desire, that had caused Rowley to give her that vicious blow; it was odd what a strange, proud feeling it gave her suddenly to know that. She could not help giving him a look in which there was the suspicion of a smile. Their eyes met.
He responds with, “And if you start getting an inferiority complex, I shall give you such a hiding as you won't forget for a month.”
Just in case you are unclear. . . this is a desirable, romantic suitor of Mary's, not an enemy.
His violent act gave her a “strange, proud feeling.” (This is another common sentiment of the times).
And this is what I have uncovered, over and over again. Some of our greatest male writers, writing of a casual violence of men on women, without any concern over the ramifications, or having anything to do with plot or character development. It was clearly an accepted aspect of society, and, thus far, I can tell you that some of our greatest male writers of the time participated in it: Ernest Hemingway, William Faulkner, W. Somerset Maugham, Herman Hesse, Dashiell Hammett.
So. . . when I tell you that I really LIKED this story. . . liked the action, the suspense, the character development, the romantic element. . . I must also share that this casual violence took me right OUT of the story, too.
And, do you know what is the part that sits the heaviest with me? When I was a teenager, I didn't even RECOGNIZE this. I was born in the 1970s and, even though I was born into a time of watching women on the news burn bras, I was also reading these works of “great literature” and internalizing God knows what.
If anyone's confused over what has happened to the traditional roles of men and women today, do you need anything more than to read this excerpt from Nathaneal West's MISS LONELYHEARTS (1933):
He decided to go to Delehanty's for a drink. In the speakeasy, he discovered a group of his friends at the bar. They greeted him and went on talking. One of them was complaining about the number of female writers.
“And they've all got three names,” he said. “Mary Roberts Wilcox, Ella Wheeler Catheter, Ford Mary Rinehart. . .”
Then some one started a train of stories by suggesting that what they all needed was a good rape.
“I knew a gal who was regular until she fell in with a group and went literary. She began writing for the little magazines about how much Beauty hurt her and ditched the boyfriend who set up pins in a bowling alley. The guys on the block got sore and took her into the lots one night. About eight of them. They ganged her proper. . .”
I don't know how anyone could read that paragraph without needing an antacid.
So: three stars to an adventurous story that W. Somerset Maugham dreamed up one day, but it's super obvious to me, both from reading CAKES AND ALE, and now this one, that the man had zero respect for women and even less for people of color.
Let's just say. . . I've been observing myself putting more and more books by the male authors from the 1930s in the donation box and hunting online for the out-of-print books from the female authors of the same time.
(If you made it to this bottom line, I thank you, sincerely, for this opportunity to vent).