Revisiting an old favourite

When I had a cold a month ago, feeling sorry for myself and tired, the latest Slightly Foxed Edition arrived through my door. I was a bit surprised that it was the series’ first fictional offering, but delighted to add to my collection of Diary of a Provincial Lady editions. And, since I was coldy and tired and grumpy, it was absolutely the perfect book to read straight away. As soon as I turn to that first diary entry on November 7th 1929 (my birthday! albeit more than half a century early), I was at home.

I’ve read and listened to Diary of a Provincial Lady by E.M. Delafield so, so many times that I basically know all the words at this point. There is no book more comforting to dive into. The daily reflections, wry asides, embarrassments, and ironies of a 1930s wife and mother are so funny, so self-deprecating, so curiously recognisable even to someone like me who shares very few of her experiences.

This new edition comes with an enjoyable preface by Slightly Foxed favourite Ysenda Maxtone Graham (who is able to make apt references to her own grandmother’s most famous work, Mrs Miniver). I don’t agree with Graham’s assertion that Diary of a Provincial Lady is the best of the series – that honour goes to The Provincial Lady Goes Further in my opinion – but I really appreciated her comparison with Delafield’s more sombre examinations of staid married life in books like The Way Things Are, and why the Provincial Lady books are somehow more effective.

I suspect you’ve all read and loved this book, so instead of a full review, I’m just going to put some quotes that made me laugh – even on the zillionth reading.

February 28th

Notice, and am gratified by, appearance of large clump of crocuses near the front gate. Should like to make whimsical and charming reference to these… but am interrupted by Cook, saying that the Fish is here, but he’s only brought cod and haddock and the haddock doesn’t smell any too fresh, so what about cod?

Have often noticed that Life is like that.

March 1st

Crowds of people at the reception. Know most of them, but am startled by strange lady in pink, wearing eye-glasses, who says that I don’t remember her – which is only too true – but that she has played tennis at my house. How, she says, are those sweet twins? Find myself telling her that they are very well indeed, before I know where I am. Can only trust never to set eyes on her again.

March 9th

Barbara goes to Evening Service, and I go to look in on her mother, whom I find in shawls, sitting in an armchair reading- rather ostentatiously – enormous Life of Lord Beaconsfield. I ask how she is, and she shakes her head and enquires if I should ever guess that her pet name amongst her friends once used to be Butterfly? (This kind of question always so difficult, as either affirmative or negative reply apt to sound unsympathetic. Feel it would hardly do to suggest that Chrysalis, in view of the shawls, would now be more appropriate.) However, says Mrs. Blenkinsop with a sad smile, it is never her way to dwell upon herself and her own troubles. She just sits there, day after day, always ready to sympathise in the little joys and troubles of others, and I would hardly believe how unfailingly these are brought to her. People say, she adds deprecatingly, that just her Smile does them good. She does not know, she says, what they mean. (Neither do I.)

April 11th

Look for Robin and eventually find him with the cat, shut up into totally unventilated linen-cupboard, eating cheese which he says he found on the back stairs.

(Undoubtedly, a certain irony can be found in the fact that I have recently been appointed to new Guardians Committee, and am expected to visit Workhouse, etc., with particular reference to children’s quarters, in order that I may offer valuable suggestions on questions of hygiene and general welfare of inmates… Can only hope that fellow-members of the Committee will never be inspired to submit my own domestic arrangements to similar inspection.)

If you haven’t read Diary of a Provincial Lady yet then, gosh, you have a treat ahead of you. And if you’re looking for a last-minute stocking filler, then this beautiful new Slightly Foxed edition is perfect.

The Chip and the Block by E.M. Delafield – #ABookADayInMay Day 22

E.M. Delafield was a very prolific novelist, and even though I’ve been reading her steadily for more than 20 years, there is still a handful of her books I’ve not read. I am pretty sure I’ve owned The Chip and the Block (1925) for the best part of those 20 years, and I finally got it down from my special Delafield shelf yesterday – and it’s lovely to spend more time in her company. (I will note that she needlessly uses the n-word in the first line, which was not an auspicious beginning, and I’m glad didn’t continue beyond that.)

If you’ve only read The Diary of a Provincial Lady and its sequels, you might think of E.M. Delafield primarily as a comic writer. And, yes, she is brilliant at comedy – often weaving dry humour into most of her more serious novels. I think The Chip and the Block is one of the least overtly funny – though there is dark humour, and the comedy that comes from somebody being totally lacking in self-knowledge.

Self-knowledge (and, yes, its lack) is the dominant theme in E.M. Delafield’s oeuvre, taken as a whole. In The Chip and the Block, it is seen chiefly in Charles Ellery, also known as Chas. He is the patriarch of a small family, with his tired, good wife Mary and his three children – Paul, Jeannie, and Victor. As the novel opens, the children are young – Victor, the youngest, is only recently engaging in conversations. The whole family has been recovering from influenza, and the most affected are Victor and Charles. Victor has been seriously ill. Charles has declared himself so. This telling scene happens during the recuperation period:

“Come along!” Father shouted gaily, catching Jeannie by the hand.

“You’re forgetting your stick, Father,” said Victor’s baby voice.

He pointed to the stick that had fallen unnoticed to the ground.

Father looked at Victor, and Victor looked back at his father. Paul could not help noticing them.

Although he was so unobservant about things and places, he always noticed people, and he often felt curious certainties as to what they were thinking and feeling.

This time he did not feel any certainties at all, but only a little uneasiness that he could not possibly have explained even to himself.

It is emblematic of many personalities. Paul is also watching, bewildering by the world even while he can perceive things that others miss. He is often close to tears, and fears his father’s ready wrath – which irritates him even more. Jeannie is content, happy to dismiss any sad feelings, and amiably unintelligent. And Victor? If Charles is the block, he is the chip. He sees through his father’s masquerades – while also being given to many of the same foibles as he grows older.

Delafield’s portrait of Charles is so frustratingly accurate. We all know people who have at least some echo of his personality. Charles is a fairly unsuccessful writer, totally given to self-mythologising. He is ruthlessly selfish but presents himself as angelically selfless, always berating his children for not considering anybody except themselves. He tells stories of finding Beethoven so beautiful as a four-year-old that he bursts into tears of artistic joy (his sharp elderly mother says he was seven years old, and cried because he’d eaten too many plums). He claims to have slaved night and day to write books while the children played and cried around his feet – while they distinctly remember being kept far from his study, and shouted out if they made any noise.

Charles doesn’t develop or grow as a character, it is fair to say, but Delafield has drawn him so well that it doesn’t matter. His arguments and self-presentation are so eloquently twisted that it is hard to disagree with him – and he certainly wouldn’t brook any contradiction, given his self-proclaimed artistic and sensitive temperament. But he is a nightmare to be near, poisoning the family around him.

The novel progresses until the children are grown up, and the second half of the novel looks more at the legacies of this upbringing – including careers, romances, and the inescapable expectations of their father. Again, they develop entirely in line with the personalities they showed as infants. Is that true? Perhaps, though I imagine there is more scope in reality for people to be distinct from their past selves. I hope I’m not very like my eight-year-old self, though maybe that is wishful thinking.

Anyway, I think this is a strong, convincing and engaging contribution to E.M. Delafield’s wide output. I did miss the wit that characterises most of her books, and she clearly wanted to do something more sombre and serious. On its own merits, it’s very good indeed.

Tea or Books? #108: Books with Bite or No Bite; Late and Soon vs A Game of Hide and Seek

Bite, E.M. Delafield, Elizabeth Taylor – welcome to episode 108!

In the first half of this episode, we discuss a topic suggested by Gina – do we prefer books with bite or without bite? All will be explained in due course… In the second half we pit two books with similar plots against each other: Late and Soon by E.M. Delafield and A Game of Hide and Seek by Elizabeth Taylor.

Do get in touch – with voice notes, questions, suggestions – to teaorbooks[at]gmail.com. You can find us at Patreon, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, your podcast app of choice.

The books and authors mentioned in this episode are:

Exit West by Mohsin Hamid
H is for Hawk by Helen Macdonald
The Goshawk by T.H. White
T.H. White by Sylvia Townsend Warner
The Real and the Romantic by Francis Spalding
Osebol by Marit Kapla
Rose Macaulay
Margery Sharp
Miss Read
O. Douglas
Someone at a Distance by Dorothy Whipple
Because of the Lockwoods by Dorothy Whipple
High Wages by Dorothy Whipple
Mrs Palfrey at the Claremont by Elizabeth Taylor
Saul Bellow
Elizabeth Fair
Ursula Orange
O, The Brave Music by Dorothy Evelyn Smith
Britannia Mews by Margery Sharp
The Stone of Chastity by Margery Sharp
Anne of Avonlea by L.M. Montgomery
Anne of Green Gables by L.M. Montgomery
Persuasion by Jane Austen
The Other Elizabeth Taylor by Nicola Beauman
Frost at Morning by Richmal Crompton
Heat Wave by Penelope Lively
Heat Lightning by Helen Hull

The Optimist by E.M. Delafield

E.M. Delafield is right up there with my favourite authors, but there are still some of her books on my shelves that I’ve had for the best part of 20 years. I recently took down The Optimist (1922), one of Delafield’s earlier novels and one I haven’t seen an awful lot of discussion about.

Owen Quintillian is a boy when he first spends time with the Morchard family – led by the calm dictator Canon Morchard, and accompanied by three of his young daughters (Lucilla, Flora, Valeria) and and one young son (Adrian), with another son David away at school. Canon Morchard acts as a tutor for Owen, but really this is a substitute family. Adrian is naughty and wilful, Valeria and Flora are romantic and emotional, and Lucilla is sternly obedient. Owen is perhaps the least categorisable; he is the onlooker, and almost takes the role of the reader.

I was reminded a lot of May Sinclair’s Anne Severn and the Fieldings, both in this section and in the rest of the novel – Owen, like Anne, is the only child who is both insider and outsider in the new community. He is expected to live by the rules of the household and understand its different mores and characters, but there is also a tacit understanding that he is a temporary participant.

Years later, when Owen has spent two years fighting in the war and a period recovering from shell shock in hospital, he returns to the Morchard family. Each child has grown, but the traits that were there before are still recognisable. Lucilla is still obedient, though with a weariness that wasn’t there before. The other sisters have romantic entanglements that include Owen in disastrous ways. Adrian and David are more enigmatic, being away at war – with everything that entails for the waiting family.

But the most dominant character – the ‘optimist’ of the title, mostly relating to patriotism and pro-war sentiment – is the Canon. He is a fascinating portrait of a domineering man slowly squeezing life out of his family, but not in a violent or ogreish way. Rather, as George Simmers wrote in his excellent review on Great War Fiction back in 2007, ‘Morchard is revealed as a monster of selfishness, manipulating his family by a form of moral blackmail – they are terrified of inspiring the pain he expresses when they cross him in the slightest particular.’

In fact, I will quote the same passage George used to illustrate this point:

“Valeria!” The Canon’s voice, subdued but distinct, came to them from without. “My dear, go to your room. This is not right, You are acting in defiance of my known wishes, although, no doubt, thoughtlessly. Bid your sister goodnight and go.”

Val did not even wait to carry out the first half of the Canon’s injunction. She caught up her brush and comb and left the room.

“Are my wishes so little to you, Valeria? Said her father, standing on the stairs. “It costs so small an act of self-sacrifice to be faithful to that which is least.”

“I’m sorry, father. We both forgot the time.”

“Thoughtless Valeria! Are you always to be my madcap daughter?”

His tone was very fond, and he kissed her and blessed her once more.

Valeria went to her own room.

She sat upon the side of her bed and cried a little.

His edicts always come from a firm moral code – one that sees himself as instructor and protector of the household. He is not just hurt but astonished if anybody contradicts or disobeys him, or even has a contrary opinion to him – there is one instance, later in the novel, where Lucilla must use long-learned manipulation to do what she believes is right, and he believes is wrong. In the Canon’s defence, he holds himself to the same high standards as everyone else, and repents and apologises if he contravenes them.

Owen is trying to establish himself as a writer, particularly one in revolt to most standards of Victorian behaviour, belief, and society. There is a clash here, when the Canon reads Owen’s magazine article on ‘The Myth of Self-Sacrifice’. While the narrative is largely on Owen’s side, it seems, there is also the suggestion that Owen’s views can be as self-indulgent and blinkered as the Canon’s, albeit from a different direction.

It’s a fascinating portrait of a family, and Owen is an excellent device for being both inside and outside the circle – it is only as The Optimist develops that we start to see more of Owen’s own character and flaws, and question some of the assumptions he has made about members of the family (and which we may have unquestioningly followed along with).

This is one of Delafield’s more serious novels but, being Delafield, there is a lightness of touch and an ironic sensibility that is never too far away. This sentence is quintessential Delafield, who always seems to return to the topic of self-(un)awareness in everything she writes:

Lucilla, for her consolation, reflected that few people are capable of distinguishing accurately between what they actually say, and what they subsequently wish themselves to have said, when reporting a conversation.

In George Simmer’s review, he concluded that The Optimist is ‘one of the most thought-provoking novels of the 1920s’ and among Delafield’s best. I think it is certainly one that would merit re-reading and thinking more deeply about. It is not among my favourite of Delafield’s, perhaps because that occasional lightness of tone isn’t reflected in the plot or characters and I prefer her in slightly more comic mode, with slightly more heightened characters – but I think there’s a very good argument that The Optimist is one of her most intriguing and complex novels.

Tea or Books? #97: Spontaneous or Planned Reading, and Tension vs Thank Heaven Fasting

How do we choose our reading, and E.M. Delafield – welcome to episode 97!

 

In the first half of the episode, we debate whether to read spontaneously or plan our reading. In the second half, two E.M. Delafield novels vie against each other: Tension, recently reprinted in the British Library Women Writers series, and Thank Heaven Fasting.

Do get in touch if you have any suggestions for future episodes, or questions for the middle section – teaorbooks@gmail.com. You can find us at Apple Podcasts, Spotify, your podcast app of choice etc, and can support the podcast at Patreon.

The books and authors we mention in this episode are:

Consequences by E.M. Delafield
The Way Things Are by E.M. Delafield
The Solange stories by F Tennyson Jesse
Mrs Alfred Sidgwick
The Hills Sleep On by Joanna Cannan
A Lion, A Mouse, and a Motor-Car by Dorothea Townshend
The Glass Wall by E.M. Delafield
Love Has No Resurrection by E.M. Delafield
The Gap of Time of Jeanette Winterson
The Winter’s Tale by William Shakespeare
The Other Side of the Bridge by Mary Lawson
Crow Lake by Mary Lawson
Barbara Kingsolver
Miss Bunting by Angela Thirkell
Love at All Ages by Angela Thirkell
The Duke’s Daughter by Angela Thirkell
Festival at Farbridge by J.B. Priestley
The Authority Gap by Mary Ann Sieghart
P.D. James
The Shelf by Phyllis Rose
Sun City by Tove Jansson
Agatha Christie
Opening Night by Ngaio Marsh
Georges Simenon
Drive Your Plow Over the Bones of the Dead by Olga Tokarczuk
Flights by Olga Tokarczuk
Where There’s Love, There’s Hate by Adolfo Bioy Casares and Silvina Ocampo
Chronicle of a Death Foretold by Gabriel García Márquez
Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen
Mary Webb
Faster! Faster! by E.M. Delafield
The War Workers by E.M. Delafield
The Crowded Street by Winifred Holtby
Brook Evans by Susan Glaspell

D is for Delafield

This is part of an ongoing series where I write about a different author for each letter of the alphabet. You can see them all here.

If you were guessing which author I’d be using for D in this series, you’d probably have put money on Delafield. Diary of a Provincial Lady is one of my favourite books and among the few I’ve re-read several times. But there is much more to Delafield than that series, as this post will show!

How many books do I have by EM Delafield?

In this picture, I forgot to include the Persephone Delafields and a couple of the Viragos, and I have lent one of her books elsewhere, but you can see that I have quite a few! Though this pic is a bit misleading. Because the pile on the left is entirely duplicates of the Provincial Lady series. It’s my one weakness when it comes to duplicates. So, all told I have 38 books by E.M. Delafield, eleven of which are the Provincial Lady series. So a total of 31 really. (NOTE: The Provincial Lady in Russia is not in that pile because it’s not a proper PL book – it’s an opportunistic retitling of Straw Without Bricks: I Visit Soviet Russia.)

How many of these have I read?

The pile on the right are the ones I’ve not read, but I have read a few Delafields that I don’t own – so the total I’ve read is 25. And there are a handful of her books I haven’t managed to track down.

How did I start reading Delafield?

Most people come to her through Diary of a Provincial Lady, but I first encountered her in a little book called Modern Humour, which I’d bought because it featured a sketch by A.A. Milne. At this point – maybe 2002? – I knew very little about authors at all, and so was reading it rather blind. And I knew nothing about E.M. Delafield when I read the two sketches featured – which turned out to be from the very excellent As Others Hear Us.

My local library had a good store of old Delafields, but the first one I read was from the open shelves – a large print edition of The Provincial Lady Goes Further – also know as The Provincial Lady in London. It might not be the traditional route to her, to read the second in a series in an enormous font, but it got me hooked and I haven’t looked back.

General impressions…

Delafield is one of those authors who really helped shape my literary taste, coming across her as a teenager and finding there was a lot to explore. And I love her just as much now – when I’ve lived twice as long. I think I’ll be reading her for the rest of my life.

She is so good at being funny – we all know that. She’s also exceptionally good at more melancholy and poignant books. Novels like Faster! Faster! and The Way Things Are can shine a light on contemporary social anxieties. I think she’s at her best when she’s using her observational skills for comedy – not just the Provincial Lady, but the sketches in As Others Hear Us and, appropriately for this section of the post, General Impressions.

And, as with A.A. Milne and Richmal Crompton, it was fun to get addicted to an author whose books take a bit of tracking down. As with last time, I started collecting when they were a bit easier to find online at an affordable price – but it still took a bit of hunting, and more satisfaction for the book hunter than if I could just have bought everything straight off the shelf of Waterstones.

And I’m rather hoping she can be included in the British Library Women Writers series… watch this space.

 

Two #1920Club Novels by E.M. Delafield

E.M. Delafield was astonishingly prolific in the first few decades of the 20th century – she managed to write about 40 books in less than thirty years. And so there are quite a few years where two books appeared – since 1920 is one of those years, I decided to read ’em both. Tension and The Heel of Achilles both bear many traits of Delafield’s novels, and are recognisably from the same author, but they are also extremely different.

Tension

Apparently I read this in 2004, but I got to the end of it without remembering a single detail – and I’m glad I re-read it, because it’s brilliant. The main characters are Lady Rossiter and Sir Julian Rossiter, and when Delafield created them I suspect she had half an eye on Mr and Mrs Bennet from Pride and Prejudice. They have very little fondness for each other, though Sir Julian usually restricts himself to silently laughing at Lady Rossiter’s nonsensical sayings and gossip. Where she differs from Mrs Bennet is that Lady R is also hypocritical and a little cruel – though she would always see it as doing her duty. That is one of the main tensions of Tension.

But all starts off very amusingly – here’s the opening of the novel:

“Auntie Iris has written a book!”

“A book!” echoed both auditors of the announcement, in keys varying between astonishment and dismay.

“Yes, and it’s going to be published, and put into a blue cover, and sold, and Auntie Iris is going to make heaps and heaps of money!”

“What is it to be called?” said Lady Rossiter rather gloomily, fixing an apprehensive eye on the exuberant niece of the authoress.

“It’s called ‘Why, Ben!’ and it’s a Story of the Sexes,” glibly quoted the young lady, unaware of the shock inflicted by this brazen announcement, delivered at the top of her squeaky, nine-year-old voice.

Could there be a better fake title than Why, Ben! – I love it, and all the comedy around how horrified everyone is by the idea of this book is glorious. Delafield might also have Austen in mind with her style in this novel – she does lots of sentences with the balance and irony of an Austen sentence, laughing at everyone involved and never saying quite everything – leaving the reader to fill in the gaps and thus feel on the side of the author.

The children (whom the Rossiters unite in loathing, though Lady R would not admit it openly) are neighbours, and the offspring of harassed, jovial Mark. Their mother is (whisper it) a ‘dypsomaniac’, shut away but very much not dead. And that is why Lady Rossiter takes an officious concern when a young woman moves to the area and starts working with Mark – because, surely, it is the same Miss Marchrose who once broke off an engagement when her fiance became disabled…

Delafield often enjoys poking fun at people who ‘Don’t want to gossip, but…’ – and sometimes she shows the dark side of it too. Tension is always an extremely funny book, particularly if you like dry, character-based, and dialogue-heavy comedy (which I definitely do), but it gets darker as it goes on. Lady Rossiter is ruthlessly determined to ruin Miss Marchrose, all in the name of protecting those around her and not wanting to gossip. She never does anything outright. She just quietly and subtly makes the situation impossible for Miss Marchrose. And Delafield is so clever at not making Lady Rossiter a deceitful character – she genuinely does believe she is doing what is right, and has an answer for every exasperated accusation Sir Julian makes. Which isn’t that many, because he follows the path of least resistance.

Delafield is brilliant when she unites comedy and tragedy, and I think Tension is one of her best books. It’s certainly stylised, but it’s a style I loved.

The Heel of Achilles

The Heel of Achilles was published the same year, and also republished as a Hutchinson’s ‘Pocket Library’ edition – but appearances are a bit deceptive because it is MUCH longer. The font is tiny in these pages. It’s a Bildungsroman about Lydia Raymond – whom we meet in the opening lines:

“I am an orphan,” reflected Lydia Raymond, with immense satisfaction.

She was a very intelligent little girl of twelve years old, and she remembered very well that when her father had died out in China, three years ago, it was her mother who had been the centre of attention and compassion. People had spoken about her poor dead father, and had praised him and pitied him, but their real attention had all been for the widow, who was there under their eyes, pathetic and sorrow-stricken. Lydia herself had been “poor little thing,” but Grandpapa and her aunts and uncle had all told her that it was her mother who must be thought of now, and she knew that they kept on saying to one another that “the child will be a comfort to poor Mary.” Her own individuality, which she felt so strongly, did not seem to count at all, and Lydia had, quite silently, resented that intensely, ever since she could remember anything at all.

She grows up with that Grandpapa and aunts and uncle – the dominating character is Grandpapa, though. He is selfish, brusque, and very weak even at the beginning of the novel – though, given how long he lives for, he must have only been about 60 when his age meant he needed to be assisted across the room. He certainly isn’t pleasant, but he takes an interest in Lydia and tries to coach her – chiefly, never to talk about herself, because people aren’t interested. Always let others talk about themselves. (He never really addresses what happens if both interlocutors are taking this approach…)

There are some funny interludes when she goes to stay with some boisterous, sporty cousins who classify anything sentimental, artistic, or even ordinarily sensible, as ‘nonsense’. Delafield sends them up brilliantly, along with Lydia’s confusion and resentment of the new world she is thrown into. She does much better at school, where her aptitude for maths apparently gets her all the friends – would that my school’s popularity system worked on maths and not sports!

This mathematical ability gets her a job doing accounts at a milliners when she leaves school, and we see her new world of a boarding house and a business, populated with its own mix of eccentrics, pathetic characters, and the odd sympathetic one.

Along the way, there’s a big jump of a decade or more, and we see the impact that a life of determined self-sacrifice has on Lydia’s family…

Delafield often returned to the idea that people who are always sacrificing themselves for others are a pain to be around. She does it very amusingly in some places (notably As Others Hear Us) and more poignantly in others – in The Heel of Achilles, it’s intended to be more poignant, I think. My problem with it is that Lydia’s self-sacrificial nature seems to come rather late in the day – the offshoot of the ‘don’t talk about yourself’ maxim, but perhaps not as thoroughly worked out a theme as it could be.

The Heel of Achilles is very good, but I think it should have been a third shorter. Delafield dwells for a long time in periods that don’t enhance the story much, and everything felt rather slow – in contract to Tension, which zips along and keeps momentum. It’s nowhere near as funny as Tension, nor is intended to be, though there are plenty of lines with that witty, ironical twist. It is, perhaps, the sort of novel to which Delafield returned most often – but, for my money, Tension is more successful.

Still, impressive that Delafield could turn her hands to two such different novels in 1920 – the main overriding theme being selfish women spoiling the lives of those around them…

Turn Back The Leaves by E.M. Delafield – #1930Club

I hope and suspect that most of us have read one of the books that E.M. Delafield published in 1930 – The Diary of a Provincial Lady. Rather less popular is the title that I picked off my well-stocked Delafield shelves: Turn Back The Leaves. I have quite a few unread Delafields among the many that I have read, and it was good to get one down.

Turn Back The Leaves is a very different novel from The Diary of a Provincial Lady. It is not at all funny, for starters. Often Delafield combines serious topics with some levity, but this is nearly absent in this tangled story of illegitimacy and secrets. And, above all, the tensions of a family maintaining Catholic mores.

The novel starts in 1890 and ends in 1929, though most of it takes place just before and after World War One. But that section needs a bit of back story, and that’s what Delafield starts us with. In brief, a woman with the extraordinary name Edmunda marries a man named Joseph, despite neither of them being enthused by the match. They are both ardent Catholics, and their families are keen for them to marry other upstanding Catholics. It is a loveless match, though neither of them have been and love and don’t particularly miss what they haven’t had. Except then, of course, Edmunda does fall in love with another man – and Stella is born illegitimately. Joseph forgives her; they have four other children; she dies. Stella is left alone in London with a paid governess and nurse, and the others grow up with Joseph and his second wife.

Fast forward a few years – and some rather unnecessarily detailed characterisation of characters we will never see again, along the way – and Stella moves back to live with her half-brother and half-sisters, though none of them know the connection. She is only there as a ‘family friend’. And has been taken in because Joseph and his new wife are keen to give her a ‘good Catholic upbringing’. Only… there are temptations in the way of her and one of her half-sisters. They both fall in love with Protestants. Marrying out of the Catholic church is not forbidden, but it is only allowed if the non-Catholic partner allows their children to be brought up as Catholics – ‘the promises’ – and the prospective husbands won’t allow this.

Delafield’s author’s foreword reads that ‘this book is in no way intended as propaganda either for or against the Roman Catholic faith. It purports only to hold up a mirror to the psychological and religious environment of a little-known section of English society as it has existed for many years, and still exists today’. This is pretty disingenuous. As with quite a lot of Delafield’s novels, particularly the early ones, this is clearly motivated by some distaste for her Catholic upbringing. It isn’t a bitter book, but you never get the sense that the author is ambivalent.

But the Catholic characters are not monsters by any means. Sir Joseph is rather domineering, but others are motivated by their love for their church and their eagerness to do right. And it’s a very engaging, well-written novel, with vivid characters who only slightly lose their vividness by the author’s attempt to have slightly too many focuses. Stella should really be front and centre, but disappears towards the end when Delafield wants us to empathise with the rest of the family too.

I don’t know much about Catholicism, and I don’t know if inter-marrying is still as big a deal, or if the official line is still that no other Christian denomination is properly following Christ. I do know that Protestants still follow the beliefs of the Protestants in this novel – that following Christ is the important bit, not the specific church. As Delafield writes in her foreword, the Catholic angle was a niche point even in 1930 – and many readers might be uncertain that their interest could be sustained in a novel which revolves around the Catholic/non-Catholic angle.

Which would be a pity, because I think Turn Back The Leaves is very good indeed. At her best, Delafield is great at giving a novel momentum as well as psychological complexity and empathetic characters. Her writing is not unduly fancy, nor does it have the hilarious phrasing of the Provincial Lady books, but she does use the quiet, unshowy prose to pull the rug from under our feet. We are suddenly hit by observations and emotional moments, in few and precise words, that we might not be expecting. I think this is the 25th novel I’ve read by Delafield, and it’s up there among the ones I’ve enjoyed most. It feels odd to read one in which she is almost never humorous at all – but perhaps she wanted to make her 1930 output as distinct as possible. And the Provincial Lady this ain’t!

The Pelicans by E.M. Delafield

The Pelicans (1918) by E.M. Delafield was a wonderful find in a real life bookshop – one I visited with Rachel and Jenny – and one of my Project 24 books. Delafield is one of my very favourite authors, and this is about the 23rd book I’ve read by her – nothing beats finding one of them in the wild. Early warning, it might well be the worst book of hers that I’ve read, but it’s testament to her talents that I still liked it.

The Pelicans

The Pelicans starts with kindly, scatterbrained Lady Argent and her artistic son Ludovic discussing the recently orphaned young sisters Rosamund and Frances. They live near the River Wye and have had an idyllic childhood in many ways – but now they are to be taken away by a distant relative of their mother, who wishes to be called Cousin Bertha. Lady Argent thinks she is a paragon of kindness, and this is clearly the reputation that Bertha wishes to promote – and quite possibly believes herself. But Ludovic is not convinced, and the sisters are also rather daunted by the move. Her friendly approaches towards them leave them rather wary and confused – but off they go, to join Bertha’s daughter, a simpering and devoted companion, and a grumpy but affectionate husband (affectionate to the girls; he clearly loathes his wife but has determined to stay out of the way).

Delafield wrote about unpleasant women time and again, and they are very often the sort who project an appearance of capability and being the supposed centre of adoring crowds. This can sometimes be done comically, as in The Provincial Lady in Wartime, or with a rather darker overtone – Faster! Faster! or Humbug. In The Pelicans it rather falls between two stools. Even her darkest novels have amusing moments, and there are many in The Pelicans that I will come onto, but she hasn’t quite decided how to treat the character of Bertha. Ironically, by making her quite nuanced (because how many people are actually ogres in disguise?), she is less satisfying as a character – do we require more consistency in a fictional construct than we would encounter in real people?

My favourite sections came when Bertha talks to her neighbour and frenemy – no word describes it better, I’m afraid – Nina, who has a son about Rosamund’s age (there is a brief romance) and is a widow. They exchange spiky conversations where each tries to outdo the other, and subtly insult each other. It’s all so delicious, and I longed for those pages – particularly whenever Nina would use the Biblical analogy of Mary and Martha to compare them, which she does often, and which displeases Bertha immensely. Another of Nina’s traits is to remind her friend about her (Nina’s) status as a widow:

“It somehow gave me a little pang – it seemed to bring back that concert, years ago when Geoffrey and I were together.”

Bertha was too familiar with the singular power that the most unlikely incidents possessed of recalling Nina’s happier hours to accord more than a passing acknowledgement towards this tender tribute to the past.

The companion-cum-housekeeper (Miss Blandflower) was also a delight to read, with her verbal tics done beautifully:

“Here I am, last but not least,” agitatedly murmured the late-comer, while her hostess cordially embraced her, and presented Rosamund and Frances.

Miss Blandflower belonged to that numerous and mistaken class of person which supposes the art of witty conversation to lie in the frequent quotation of well-known tags and the humorously-intended mispronunciation of the more ordinary words in the English language.

These examples show you the way Delafield has with a sardonic sentence, familiar to anybody who has read any of her novels, and I could read it for hours. But this novel gives us rather more of a different sort of novel – one which sneaks into so many of her early novels: it’s about a nunnery. Frances becomes very involved in the Catholic church (Bertha is not Catholic, but has a deep interest) and this takes over – Frances goes on a retreat, and eventually decides to live there, and many of the scenes are in this new cast of characters. It doesn’t follow the well-worn path of bashing the church, thankfully, but it’s a new set of people when we haven’t really got full potential out of the original set, and they were not as interesting to read about. It got a little slow, though there were definitely highlights in the dialogue of a booming woman who lived at the nunnery (though not a nun) and considered herself rather more at home than those around her might suggest.

The main issue with The Pelicans is probably structure. It covers so much of the girls’ lives that we never quite linger at any one stage long enough – and the periods Delafield picks seem a little disjointed and unexpected, as though she’d plunged into their timeline at random. It was only her third novel; she got much better at this.

So – her humour and the way she balanced comic sentences was already there. The melodrama that popped its head up throughout her career was a little unbridled. She hadn’t quite worked out how to manipulate characters into the forms that would work best for her. But it’s always fascinating to see the development of an author, and – if this is perhaps at the bottom of my list of EMD reads – it’s pretty impressive that it’s still really rather good. Hurrah for Delafield!

Messalina of the Suburbs by E.M. Delafield

Messalina of the SuburbsRachel and I did a recent podcast episode on Messalina of the Suburbs (1924) by E.M. Delafield and A Pin To See the Peepshow (1934) by F. Tennyson Jesse – both based on the same real life murder – but I know that plenty of people don’t listen to podcasts, so I’ll review ’em both too. First up: the E.M. Delafield (which I actually read second of the pair).

Believe it or not, this it the 23rd book I’ve read by EMD, and I still have plenty of others on my shelf left to read. Thank Heaven, fasting, for a prolific favourite author! It’s not super easy to find in book-form, but the ebook is very cheaply available – and, while it’s not one of her absolute best, I certainly found it a really good novel.

As far as I know, this was her only novel written about real life events – and written very shortly after them; the Thompson/Bywaters trial had only recently finished while she was writing the novel. You’ll find plenty of detail about all of that on Wikipedia, but essentially a woman was in a love triangle with her husband and her lover – the lover killed the husband in a sudden attack, but the woman was also tried for the crime of complicity. Whether or not she was complicit is something by Delafield and Jesse consider – I shan’t say the outcome of the trial for now.

Delafield’s novel seems pretty faithful to the set up (though, like Jesse, she makes the husband much older than he actually was). And we start off seeing the early life of the woman she calls Elsie – the tone being set by the opening words “Elsie, I’ve told you before, I won’t have you going with boys”. (Indeed, it was set before you open the novel if you happen to know who Messalina was – which I did not. Another one for Wikipedia, if you’re interested.)

The woman speaking is Elsie’s mother, and Delafield paints a world of respectable poverty for Elsie and her sister and mother. Lots of “She’s a good gurl, my Elsie” style dialogue – which was very entertaining to read, for the most part (Delafield can’t help being funny, even in a serious novel) though I have no real idea how much people ever did talk in this way. Certainly the working-class characters talk in a mix of salt-of-the-earth cliches, but people do speak in cliches, don’t they? Is it patronising, or is more patronising to put eloquence into the mouths of characters who probably never had it? Hard to say.

After a brief stint as a sort of housekeeper, during which Elsie gets entangled with the father of the family and is ousted, she marries a pushy man called Horace. He becomes rather an ogre as soon as she has a ring on her finger – alienating her from her family, demanding that she does as she’s told, and so forth. It’s a little cartoonish, but the whole novel is a little heightened, even stagey, so it more or less works. It does, however, mean the reader isn’t terribly heartbroken when Elsie starts an affair with good-looking Leslie – or (skipping forward, because I’ve already spoiled the crisis) when a drunk and angry Leslie kills Horace…

Delafield often treads a path between romance novel and her usual sardonic eye. Those aren’t necessarily mutually exclusive, of course, but it’s still a careful tightrope to walk – because her wit might undercut how seriously we might be meant to take the relationship between Elsie and Leslie. But she makes it work, because she’s fabs.

The love-affair of Elsie Williams and Leslie Morrison swept on its course, and in the early days of their madness neither of them paused for an instant to count its possible cost.

It seemed indeed, as though Fate were deliberately simplifying their way.

Horace Williams appeared unable to give his attention to anything beyond his newly-discovered digestive trouble, and remained constantly indoors through the hottest and finest of the summer days, experimenting upon himself with drugs, and studying tables of dietetic values.

Occasionally, the need to add in things that really happened – particularly letters that were sent, in which ‘Elsie’ suggests she is trying to poison her husband – mean that the narrative has a bit of a jolt. Delafield tidies away required moments in slightly clumsy asides, that make the reader feel that perhaps the real people weren’t quite like this. But they are small jolts, not earthquakes.

The novel ends during the trial – which came as rather a surprise to me, as the book was far from finished. It turns out there was a collection of short stories at the end, which were enjoyable enough (though mostly about how terrible women can be to women) – but made the ending feel more abrupt to me than it probably is. Still, the novel is definitely up to Delafield’s usual excellent calibre, and I recommend getting hold of a copy.

If you listened to the podcast, you’ll know that (much as I liked this novel) I preferred A Pin To See The Peepshow – so I hope I get around to writing about that one soon!