Recent reading and some D. K. Broster links

[regshoe]

First, a couple of D. K. Broster fandom things, thanks to theseatheseatheopensea: Flight of the Heron is now available as a pdf on archive.org; and here is another photograph of Broster herself, in academic dress and accompanied by a little magazine bio that must have been written while she was working on FotH!

According to Gibson by Denis Mackail (1923). A loose series of comic stories which Mackail narrates in character as himself, recording the absurd but entertaining tall tales told to him by Gibson, a mysterious eccentric from his club. The stories themselves feature ghosts, improbable scientific developments, political intrigue and various involved and contradictory backstories for Gibson himself, about whom Mackail's fictional persona eventually discovers a little more of the truth... The stories were good fun—the style and sense of humour are very much reminiscent of P. G. Wodehouse—but nowhere near as good as Greenery Street, which was a bit of a disappointment.

Afoot in England by W. H. Hudson (1909). More lovely nature/travel writing—this one is about Hudson's various adventures travelling around England (by which he, as so often in literature, means the south of England) on foot and by bicycle, staying in remote villages and famous cities, observing both the natural world and the people he meets and writing about it all in beautiful detail. There are various interesting local places, the Roman ruins at Silchester (I recognised the name Calleva from Rosemary Sutcliff!), watching the midsummer sunrise at Stonehenge, more on the avian residents of Salisbury Cathedral and lots more, all illustrated with some absolutely gorgeous descriptive writing and enlivened by Hudson's sometimes slightly odd but usually interesting opinions. (I've just learnt from his Wikipedia page that he was a supporter of Lamarckian evolution—still within the bounds of scientific respectability at this time, but it's still somehow funny to think of it overlapping with the beginnings of the modern conservation movement).

Regiment of Women by Clemence Dane (1917). Well, this is something of a book! It's set at a girls' school and deals with the relationship between two teachers: Clare Hartill, the de facto head of the school who rules with a sort of domineering manipulativeness and is widely adored by the girls, and Alwynne Durand, a new and very young mistress who quickly becomes a favourite with the girls and best friends with Clare. (I shipped it from the omelette onwards, of course). Also important is the relationship between Clare and one of her protégés, the thirteen-year-old and academically brilliant Louise Denny, whom we see struggling with the standard of work in the higher form into which Clare has promoted her alongside a difficult and unhappy home life. It all ends badly. That Clare and Alwynne's relationship is a lesbian one is never stated in so many words, but is almost kind of taken for granted by the book—others characters talk about how Alwynne is acting as though she was in love, how obviously Clare is incompatible with the idea of marriage for Alwynne, and so on. Apparently this book inspired The Well of Loneliness, and I can definitely see the resemblance, in the ideas about what lesbians are and how relationships between women work, and in the shape of the ending. This book has a really, really bad ending. OK, I know I rarely have good things to say about het love interests, but Alwynne's is definitely worse than most of them. The entire way the plot is structured to get them together made my skin crawl, and frankly I don't see that Elsbeth and Roger's treatment of Alwynne is really any better than Clare's. Poor Alwynne—much as I liked Clare as a character, I ended up just wanting Alwynne to get away from all the other characters and find some nice girl who treats her well and likes her for who she is and doesn't try to manipulate her into anything. :( The point the book is evidently trying to make is that independent women in general and lesbians in particular are unhealthy, unnatural and doomed to shrivel in their own bitterness, whereas a nice heterosexual life is natural and healthy and if a woman thinks she doesn't want or need it she just needs to be manipulated into it by the oh-so-kind characters who know better, don't you see, then she'll be happy. Anyway, it fails thoroughly. Ugh. It was still worth reading! Interesting historically as well as in the intrigue at the school—there are some great moments of characters trying to manipulate each other at cross purposes and totally misunderstanding each other's intentions, very darkly funny. Also, poor Louise. :(

Comments

[oursin]

Regiment of Women is a deeply weird and horrible book - I had to reread it for an article I wrote on female friendships/passions in the interwar era and it was not a pleasant experience - and Dane dedicated it to her female partner!!! WHAT - 'here, darling, I've just written a novel about an evil manipulative lesbian and dedicated it to you - smoochies!'

[starshipfox]

Wow, I didn't know she'd dedicated to her partner -- how awful! I read Regiment of Women because it was published by a lesbian imprint, and it wasn't what I was expecting. It's deeply unpleasant throughout -- Clemence Dane seems to take pleasure in hating women and lesbians, while also being an independent lesbian writer? Very inscrutable decision.

[oursin]

I was just looking up some passages in her essay collection The Woman's Side, and there she's both about 'evil manipulative women' in all-women communities like schools and also suggesting that there were factors to do with social issues around the 'surplus woman' problem. It is odd, because other writers at the same time were suggesting at the very least that the unmarried woman whose potential spouse had been killed in the Great War could form a healthy supportive relationship with another woman in similar condition.

I think a biography might be illuminating and interesting but I don't think there is one.

[starshipfox]

My understanding is that Clemence Dane was very well-respected in her day, even if she has (rightly) fallen out of fashion now, so it's odd that there is no biography: I'm sure there would be plenty of material! How terrible, to decide that women who are unmarried due to the Great War are "surplus" and that companionship among women is bad -- especially when you yourself are Sapphically inclined. She must have been a very strange person!

[oursin]

'Surplus women' was a longstanding terms from the Victorian era (women outnumbering men at the marriageable years).

One would think there was material for a biography - even if her own papers do not survive, she was in correspondence with lots of people whose papers do - great pals with e.g. Noel Coward.

I've just been reading her much shorter novel Legend which has a similar relationship between older/younger woman but in a more Boho/literary setting.

[starshipfox]

I should not be surprised by that "surplus women" was a term and concept in wider use -- and yet I am! Is Legend similar in its condemnation of lesbians, or is it any more positive? I generally love a good older/younger woman relationship story, but probably not in this case!

I can imagine that it might be difficult to engage with Clemence Dane for long enough to write a biography -- she seems pretty unpleasant -- but she also seems like a rich and interesting subject!

[oursin]

The older woman in Legend is pretty much a toxic envious possessive bitch, alas, though the younger one comes over (she is only discussed in retrospect) as much less of a hapless victim than Alwynne.

Oddly enough such glimpes of Dane as one gets in memoirs of the day are of a jolly old duck in the Margaret Rutherford mould, but that was probably in later life, perhaps mellowed by success.

[regshoe]

Oh wow! I did think the dedication sounded a bit inappropriately cheerful for the book, but had no idea it was to her actual female partner, or that she even had one. That is bizarre.

[hyarrowen]

That's an interesting write up of DK Broster! She's mostly so elusive that it's quite a surprise to see her come out of the shadows. I love the snark about the mis-genre-ing of historical fiction. Nowadays the complaint would probably be that it's seen as romance. People do like to categorise stuff, and then judge on that categorisation.

[regshoe]

Yes, I liked that bit too! I think the view that historical fiction, fantasy etc. can't be 'real' literature is still sadly prevalent (I keep finding Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell on the 'general fiction' shelves at bookshops, as if being good and deservedly well-respected means it's suddenly not all about magic), so I quite agree with her that that kind of categorisation is nonsense. :)

[luzula]

The point the book is evidently trying to make is that independent women in general and lesbians in particular are unhealthy, unnatural and doomed to shrivel in their own bitterness, whereas a nice heterosexual life is natural and healthy and if a woman thinks she doesn't want or need it she just needs to be manipulated into it by the oh-so-kind characters who know better, don't you see, then she'll be happy.

Aaaaaah. *runs the other way*

Also, interesting to know that Broster's own favorite of her books, at least before FotH, was The Wounded Name. Which makes sense, it certainly feels like a deeply iddy book.

[regshoe]

Aaaaaah. *runs the other way*

Haha, that's about it! At least The Well of Loneliness got it right about where the sympathy ought to be.

Yes, that was interesting and not terribly surprising—it definitely gives the feel of an author just doing exactly what she wants in a story. :D

[theseatheseatheopensea]

Thanks for the heads up about the "really, really bad ending"... "ugh" seems like a perfect description! I'm glad that some bits were still good, though... and that you had other lighter+funnier books, to provide some balance! :)

[regshoe]

Heh, yes, it is about that. And balance is certainly a good thing!

[osprey_archer]

I read Regiment of Women a few years ago and that book is A LOT. It's so well-written (I love that dark academia vibe) and I think if the book focused on how Clare, specifically, is a cruel and manipulative if superficially charming person, then it would actually hold up pretty well. But instead it builds an entire argument that ALL relationships between women are like this if they get too emotionally involved. (IIRC there's a sequence where Alwynne gets lost in a terrifying dark wood, which is possibly a metaphor for lesbianism, given that she's rescued by the endgame love interest? And then possibly they have a talk about how Girls' Schools Are Unnatural and Coed Schools Are Better?) Even the title drives home the message.

Also POOR LOUISE. Alwynne at least gets away (possibly out of the frying pan into the fire, but at least she's still alive and kicking), whereas Louise... God, I just wanted nice things for Louise.

[regshoe]

Yeah, it could have made a much better story without the generalisations! I did enjoy the writing and the portrayal of manipulation and cruelty in Clare, and if she'd kept that emotional atmosphere specific it could have been a good thing. Although I did think one of the book's biggest flaws was its failure to recognise that Roger and Elsbeth are just as manipulative of Alwynne in their own way, symbolic rescues from terrifying dark woods and all—we're not just told that all f/f relationships are evil, we're shown a horrible m/f relationship and told that it's good—perhaps it would have needed to realise that, as well.

God, I just wanted nice things for Louise.

Agreed. :(