The Line of Beauty - Section one, 1983 (June 2015)

[Casceil]

This thread is for discussion of the first part of the book, which tells us about the events of 1983. Nick, fresh from Oxford, has moved into the home of the family of one of his Oxford friends, Toby. Toby's father is Gerald Feddens, a Member of Parliament. Initially, Nick seems to be there as sort of a house-sitter, but he continues to stay long after the family has returned from its travels.

[LindaJ^]

Casceil wrote: "Nick seems to be there as sort of a house-sitter, but he continues to stay long after the family has returned from its travels"

This comment raises the significance of Nick's name -- Nick Guest. While the Nick half is probably best left to a discussion of the whole book, the surname Guest seems relevant from the beginning. As you note Casceil, Nick does seem to overstay the welcome of any guest. And even as he becomes a boarder, he still seems to have more of a guest persona. He participates in all the family events, but always seems just a bit removed, such as with Toby's 21st birthday party when, for a short time, he thought the suggestion that it would also be a celebration of his birthday before it became clear that he would just be a guest. In some ways, Nick is like the county cousin who comes to visit the city, where his rich relatives are kindly and allow him to participate in family events, but where there is always a sense of distance between them.

[Casceil]

The surname "Guest" does seem very appropriate for Nick. As I read through the book, I found myself wondering why Nick was still staying there in 1986, and then in 1987. Early on in the book, he seemed to sort of "help out" at social events at the house, but as time went on he seemed to do less of that.

One review I read commented on possible similarities to the "Nick" who is Gatsby's friend and neighbor in the Great Gatsby. I don't know if that was intended, or if the reviewer was stretching. Nick Guest, like that other Nick, seems self-effacing in the beginning. But it seemed to me that Nick Guest changed over time to sort of assume that he was part of the family.

[LindaJ^]

Casceil wrote: "The surname "Guest" does seem very appropriate for Nick. As I read through the book, I found myself wondering why Nick was still staying there in 1986, and then in 1987. Early on in the book, he ..."

I read a number of reviews that talked about Nick seeming to be a reference both Nick Carraway in The Great Gatsby and Nicholas Jenkins in A Dance to the Music of Time. I can see a resemblence to both, in that all three begin as young and somewhat naive.

[Caroline]

Just finished this section and am not sure how I'm liking it yet. Initially, I was intrigued by the characters and was curious to see what was going to happen, but so far it doesn't feel like much of anything has come up. I find Nick to be completely untrustworthy - it is disconcerting how easy it is for him to lie so it is hard to know how much of what he reveals about himself is true. There is also something painful about observing him discovering his sexuality. He frequently describes his feelings and desires as scandalous, and mentions he feels unworthy of being in the Feddens' home, or is at least shocked that they trust him there (though he never makes any attempt to leave). To me, these feelings don't seem particularly different from anything Catherine or Toby may feel, but Nick goes on as though he's committing horrendous crimes simply by wanting to act upon some of his sexual desires (at least at first).

It's been a long time since I've read any Henry James, and I haven't read much, but I re-read the Great Gatsby a couple years ago so it is much fresher. I see a few similarities between Nick Carraway and Nick Guest, mainly within their statuses, but their roles and personalities seem far different. Carraway feels more like a non-character - someone only there to provide a perspective of Gatsby's life. In contrast, while Guest does observe the Feddens and their interactions with "outsiders" (such as the minicab driver who brings Catherine in one night), he also consciously tries to figure out how he fits into their world. His interests are always present, whereas we only learn a few things about Carraway's desires here and there, such as his romantic interest in Jordan Baker. Carraway also seems to genuinely care about the other people in the story, or to at least respect them, but I'm not sure Nick Guest feels the same way about the Feddens. Carraway is an honest narrator while Guest is not.

[Casceil]

I think Nick as a narrator is as honest with us as he is with himself. But I don't think he is terribly honest with himself.

Part of Nick's role or "job" in the house is to be "the Cat sitter," i.e., to look after Catherine. Early on, we see a night when Cat is feeling suicidal, and Nick has to help her get through it. He does his best, and he cancels plans that are very important to him (a first date with Leo) to stay home with her so she won't be alone. He has an internal debate about whether to notify her parents. He decides not to, because he doesn't see that it would help anything. What do you think? Should he have called the parents? And said what? "I've removed knives and sharp objects from her room." Or maybe just, "I'm worried about Catherine; she's having a hard time right now." Or did he do the right thing, saying nothing? If he had called the parents, would either Nick or Catherine view it as some kind of breach of Catherine's trust? I seriously doubt she would have wanted them to know. It is possible Nick prevented a suicide that night. If so, the Feddens really did owe him something. We know Nick was paying some very low rent, but to what extent was he "earning his keep"?

[Caroline]

I'm not sure that Nick is fully honest with us. He leaves hints that he's not being fully honest but it's not really until the second section that we learn more about his family.

Nick did play a role in saving Catherine but it almost felt like a matter of convenience - like his life would become more complicated if she were to succeed. Maybe I'm just being too skeptical!

[LindaJ^]

I think Nick ultimately was loyal to Cat. Yes, her parents had left him in charge of the house and her, although it seems they thought at that time she was not having the severe depressions of the past, and he wanted them to like him. But, he also really wanted to go on that date. And, he chose not to call the parents, knowing she did not want that. So on this one, I'm willing to give Nick a pass.

In this first section, he's a naïve, young guy excited to find himself where he is and wanting to maintain this new position in society and somewhat embarrassed about his "true" social class. I don't think that's unusual.

[Casceil]

We are seeing everything from Nick's point of view, but the narration is actually third person. Nick isn't so much "telling" us anything, as we are seeing things through Nick's eyes.

I do think Nick cares for Catherine and feels responsible for her. Saving Catherine was not really "convenient." He could have removed the sharp objects from her room and then gone on with his evening plans.

[Caroline]

Perhaps convenient was too harsh a word there. I was still caught up with the Nick of section two and was holding the Nick of section one to the same standard. I'm still not convinced that he cares all that much for Catherine - not that he would ever want to see her dead, but more that he has a sense of duty towards the Feddens.