What a curious novel, which has left rather an impression on me, even though I find it a little complex to untangle. I bought For All We Know [1955] in 2011, based on having enjoyed her books on Jane Austen that she co-wrote with Sheila Kaye-Smith. She’s also one of those names you see a lot if you’re interested in women writers in the early/mid twentieth century – and years ago I did read her novel Ten Days of Christmas. But somehow it still felt like I was a Stern fiction newbie. Do Christmas novels feel substantially different? Like you haven’t really heard a singer if you’ve only listened to their Christmas album?
Anyway, I decided to see what was going on with For All We Know – the sort of title that isn’t really giving anything away. What I think of as an Alan Ayckbourn-esque title – trips off the tongue and doesn’t really mean anything.
I was daunted by a family tree in the opening pages. For me, a family tree in a book is a tacit way of admitting that they haven’t done a good job delineating characters. But onwards – the first section, of five, is a family group discussing Gillian’s recent biography of the whole dynasty. She has been working on it for years, and it has been a total critical and commercial flop. Gillian is a biographer of some note, and the family is well known in theatrical circles, so why has it not been a success? Well, because Gillian has ignored the noted Bettina, and devoted significant sections to Bettina’s son Rendal, who is of no public note.
This family gathering and sotto voce discussions over, we jump back a few decades – to an infant Gillian, encountering Bettina’s side of the family for the first time. Bettina is Gillian’s grandfather’s sister’s daughter, whatever that translates into in terms of cousins and removes. That side of the family has a whole range of siblings and cousins and whatnot, and you quickly work out why the family tree is needed. All you need to know is that Gillian’s grandfather is the head of the side of the family that isn’t famous, and Bettina’s mother is the head of the side that is.
It was Timothy, her cousin, who had casually referred to Gillian’s grandfather and her Uncle Conrad as the ‘failure branch’ of the family tree. Dear, dear Timothy! Happily able to say even worse than that, not to tease nor to be cruel but because he could not for the life of him see why she need mind, as it was true. Timothy had a thick blank spot, and though only twelve years old when he came forth with this chubby definition of Gillian’s immediate family as compared with his own, indisputably the ‘celebrity branch’, he would be just as capable of saying it to-day when he was sixteen, because the thick blank spot had not grown more delicately assailable and nor had he; just one of those get-away-with-murder-boys, every year handsomer, and brilliant at everything he undertook.
Gillian is a few years younger, and in awe of this daunting family – though also enamoured by them, and desperate for them to show her attention and affection. The strength of For All We Know is the Stern’s understanding of the power of embarrassing or upsetting moments. She is so good at children and the way they feel so strongly in the moment. There are a couple of incidents where young Gillian feels she is being laughed at by the family – and, even more powerfully, one moment of triumph that is later forgotten by the people she thought she’d impressed. In a biography, these moments wouldn’t even warrant a footnote – but in Gillian’s young mind, they are seismic. She decides that she will one day write the biography of the family, and begins to fill notebooks with observations and eavesdroppings.
The novel has a further three parts, jumping forward in time, seeing how Gillian’s life becomes more embroiled with the family. Timothy fulfils his early promise and becomes a big-name actor in Hollywood; Rendal has fulfilled the prediction that he will have a much less illustrious career. Gillian has grown in confidence, though still clearly in awe of what Bettina thinks, and capable of strong emotional reactions.
One of the interesting things about For All We Know is that, jumping in stages through this family’s history, Stern doesn’t land in the most significant places. We hear about marriages that have happened between sections, and of moments of success and fame. The chapters of narrative seem almost random, in terms of a timeline, but perhaps they are the places of biggest emotional impact – not the places that Gillian’s biography would highlight. Stern is more interested in the ways that relationships within the family change. And particularly between Gillian and Bettina. There is no big surprise twist or gotcha moment – I did wonder if Bettina would turn out to be Gillian’s mother or something, but there’s nothing like that. But there are times when their relationship shifts dramatically – largely because what they want and expect from it is so different.
Getting to the end of For All We Know, I was left with a really strong impression of the emotional weight of the narrative – and, yes, slightly disconcerted by the curious structure and the events that aren’t covered. I can see why Stern chose to pick the moments she did – and yet I feel a bit like Gillian in the early chapters. That I’ve been watching a family from the outside, not quite privy to their most significant memories. I like a novel to leave me thinking, and I’m not quite sure yet whether I’ll remember this novel as a brilliant success or as something a little off-kilter. Or perhaps both?
How interesting. It sounds like this one will take a little while to settle with you! I’ve not read any Stern, but I get your point about the family tree. And while this could be an interesting way to tell a family history (often by being in the margins) it sounds like the jury’s out as to whether it’s a success.
It is already growing on me after I’ve finished – one of those! I definitely need to try some more.
Perhaps give Stern’s The Matriarch Chronicles and The Young Matriarch a try as well.
https://www.amazon.com/Matriarch-Chronicle-G-B-Stern/dp/1417903635
https://www.amazon.com/Young-Matriarch-g-stern/dp/B000NQA7Y0/ref=sr_1_2?dchild=1&keywords=young+matriarch+stern&qid=1610997007&s=books&sr=1-2
I do have The Matriach, which I’m assuming is the same thing?
I have a 1936 Knopf volume called The Matriarch Chronicles, which contains The Matriarch, A Deputy was King, Mosaic, and Shining and Free, all separate books. The Young Matriarch was (I think) the last in the series, stand alone, published in 1942.
Ohhh, I really love what you’ve said about how the more obvious events in characters’ lives are left in the gaps between other times. That’s something that greatly intrigues me about a storyteller’s way of telling a tale. Also, I agree that Christmas stories might be a little like Christmas music…there is another weight to the project that doesn’t entirely belong to the writer/singer. On the matter of family trees, I agree that they could be viewed as a sign of laziness, but I don’t think it’s always about the writer’s laziness in developing characters…I think some have acknowledged that readers are lazy too and would appreciate a short-hand guide rather than have to pay closer attention to an ensemble cast. Maybe it depends whether the publisher or the author has conceived of including the device? Interesting to ponder. I hope you enjoy your next venture into Stern territory…I’ve heard good things about the VMC publications of hers.
Yes, it’s probably just my prejudice! I have two more of her novels and 3 of her memoirs on my shelves, so plenty to try and explore. She was so prolific!
I love GB Stern, though I haven’t read this one, and strongly recommend that you continue your adventures, I think you might like her a lot.
Oo recommendations please, Moira!