Catherine Carter by Pamela Hansford Johnson #1952Club

One of the things I love about our clubs are when it leads me to read books that have languished on my shelves for years – and they end up exceeding my expectations. In some cases, by a long way. I’d be surprised if Catherine Carter doesn’t end up on my favourite reads for the year, and I’m grateful to the 1952 Club for getting it off my shelves. (You may have already heard Rachel and me talk about it on Tea or Books?)

I’m also indebted to Jane. Back in 2017, we participated in a Secret Santa at a group devoted to Virago Modern Classics on LibraryThing – and Jane sent me an incredible tower of books. Each of them had a postcard included about why she’d chosen them: ‘This one because I remembered that you liked theatrical settings, because I enjoyed it, and because I remembered that you read PHJ’s book about Ivy Compton-Burnett.’ (And it’s signed!)

 

View this post on Instagram

 

A post shared by Simon Thomas (@simondavidthomas)

Indeed, that’s one of a handful of books I’d previously read by Pamela Hansford Johnson. I enjoyed The Honours Board, I didn’t like An Error of Judgement and I didn’t remember a lot about The Unspeakable Skipton. Well, none of that prepared me for how wonderful Catherine Carter is – and how very different from her other novels.

The books I’ve read by her are always populated by interesting people, but they are treated with authorial detachment. She presents them, she unveils their weaknesses and (less often) their strengths, but she doesn’t seem to have much fondness for them. That’s fine; it’s a type of writing I often enjoy. But Catherine Carter is the opposite – it is suffused by the author’s affection for the main characters, even when they are being weak and flawed. In that way, it reminded me of Elizabeth Goudge. It’s by a long distance my favourite of hers so far.

Right, I haven’t told you anything about what Catherine Carter is about – though the cover might give you a clue. Hansford Johnson takes us to the world of 1880s theatre. Specifically the company presided over by Henry Peverel – an actor/manager (but not owner) who is loosely based on Sir Henry Irving in physical appearance and mannerisms, though not story. He is renowned and proud of it. He takes advice from few and has close friendships with even fewer – but he has an abiding love for the theatre, and respect for talent and good judgement, that means he is often unexpectedly amiable. There is nothing malicious about him, but he does consider himself a greater authority than anybody else on what makes a play or a part work. And he is right to think so.

‘In the middle of luncheon,’ goes the opening line, ‘Henry Peverel remembered that he had promised to hear Mostyn’s niece recite.’ And that’s where Catherine Carter comes in. Mostyn is one of Peverel’s almost-friends and a playwright who is respected for his verse plays – but not loved. Peverel doesn’t want to put on one of Mostyn’s plays because he knows it will be a financial disaster – and so, out of a sort of guilt, he hears Catherine Carter recite. She is young, agitated, jumpy. But Peverel sees talent there. He agrees to take her into the company – initially without any parts – but he will coach her once a week.

Catherine Carter is a long book – 467 pages in this edition, though I’ve seen it listed at 576 pages in another. And that means it has plenty of breathing space to take its time. The plot is the gradually evolving relationship between Catherine and Peverel, but Hansford Johnson isn’t rushing anything. We might guess from the outset that they will fall in love, but I was thankful it didn’t happen too suddenly. There is the age gap between them – about 18 years, I think – but it’s really the imbalance of power that would have made any sudden romance hard to stomach. Catherine is an ingenue, albeit one who quickly starts standing up for her own views, challenging those of others around her. Peverel has final say in which roles are given to whom, and even whether or not Catherine is part of the company. It is right that we spend the first hundred or so pages slowly introducing Catherine to this world.

And Hansford Johnson writes so well about the theatre. I don’t know how accurate it is about the specifics of 1880s theatre, but she is wonderful on the process more broadly – the ways in which people explore the psychology of a character, both understanding the motivations as written by the playwright, and finding their own unique interpretations of the role. Hansford Johnson references some (then) modern plays that I think might be made up, though also possible I just don’t know them – but her main focus is on Shakespeare. Along the way, in Catherine Carter, are enveloping explorations of Much Ado About Nothing, Romeo and Juliet, Othello, HamletAnthony and Cleopatra and more. The novel is soaked in a love and respect for theatrical acting, and an unspoken defence of its vitality. How many modern novels would allow an author the time to luxuriate in these discussions? But how brilliantly they build up a sense of this closed world, where theatre and performance are everything.

Here is the moment, after many weeks of their coaching, where Catherine realises she has been elevated from student to equal:

So, as he replied, as they spoke together in a common dream, Catherine became almost wholly Juliet, forgetting herself almost wholly: yet beneath the love and the poetry, and the spell of that perfect metamorphosis which is the rarest but most profound joy which actors know, she realised that she was changed.

Some people become aware at an early stage that the progress of their life and spirit will take place not by a slow imperceptible development but by sudden leaps, so unpredictable that they cannot be watched for. It is the patient people who know this; they are patient because they cannot force what must come to them apparently from without, and through the oddest agencies. They may know, in a second, the determining of twenty years or a lifetime.

When Catherine understood that for the first time Peverel was playing to her as an equal, not reserving part of his mind for the inspection of a pupil, but giving the whole of it to his own interpretation, trusting her to give it to him, unwatched, uninstructed, as freely as he gave to her, she knew that the certainties of her childhood, the affirmations of the looking-glass, had not deceived her. She understood with a calm and radiant clarity, that whether or not she ever became a great actress, it was within her spirit to be so.

Catherine slowly, slowly rises through the ranks of the cast. There is an excellently done section where she is offered her first speaking part in a performance. Flattered by her achievements in these sessions with Peverel, she is holding out for one of the main roles. If not the female lead, then at least a good speaking part. And she is given… the role of the maid. It comes with a handful of words, but that is all. She cannot hide her disappointment – but it is only when overhearing other members of the company being good-naturedly envious that she realises she is wrong. It is a privilege to have any part. But it is too late: Peverel has seen her first reaction. Hansford Johnson is excellent at developing the ways that Catherine and Peverel behave towards each other, and think of each other, throughout the hundreds of pages of Catherine Carter. It is always shifting, evolving. At heart is a mutual respect, but at any moment there might be pity, anger, love, disappointment, care, regret layered over the top. As a portrait of two confident, determined people who are pulled forever into some sort of synergy, it feels positively Shakespearean.

Hansford Johnson’s writing is as rich as her creation of characters. Here is a moment, relatively early in the novel, where Catherine fears she will be cast out:

She could hear the beat of her own heart, echoing from the stony walls. It had not occurred to her before this moment that he might dismiss her, and the idea made her feel sick. All that morning she had thought about him in various differing fashions; humbly, angrily, even contemptuously. Now, her gaze upon his long, lean back, his angular skull, upon the left shoulder borne a little higher than the right, her heart froze in contemplation of a world without him. Echo and emptiness, the fleeting smiles of strangers and the horror of every-day: and his voice taken from her. He must remember that she was young and foolish, and still, still teachable.

Unlocking the door, he held it as she passed before him. He took her not into the office but into his sitting-room, where the fire was lit. The wine with its load of dust blew darkness across the sky. The windowpanes rattled and were rayed with rain. It was a day for farewells.

I thought the pacing of those paragraphs was excellent, particularly the end. And there was something about the repeated ‘still, still teachable’ that I found very effective. Throughout, her writing is beautiful without being unduly showy. I found it a page-turner, despite the slow ease of the plot.

The novel is often also funny – largely due to Catherine’s mother, always called Mrs Carter by the narrative. She is a ‘stage mom’ before the term existed – though one you can’t help loving. Convinced of Catherine’s talent, she sees anything other than a starring role as a bitter insult – while also able to turn any review into a dazzling compliment in her mind. Catherine is constantly embarrassed by her, unsuccessfully trying to repress her, and secure in her love. It’s a well-judged relationship that adds enough humour to the novel to keep it light, without falling into caricature.

Hansford Johnson is also good on the ways in which theatricality can seep into one’s bones. She clearly has a deep respect for it herself, as evidenced by her fascinating delving into the whole process of putting on a play, but she’s not above some gentle teasing of theatrical types. Here are Henry and Catherine, mid-argument:

Henry got up and went to the window. It is a convention of the theatre that persons engaged in any tense or distressful scene are given to walking about; up to the window, down to the desk. And that quarrelling persons are given to conducting their quarrels back to back. It always seemed to Catherine that this was utterly unlike the habits of real life: strong human emotion, in her experience, usually immobilised its subject. For her own part, she had never conducted any business of maximum important to herself whilst moving about a room. Henry, however, a man of the theatre, was playing the scene according to its rules. The stage, Catherine felt, was set; Henry, upstage to window, left; Mrs Carter (seated) centre; herself (seated) downstage, right. She was unhappy and embarrassed.

I realise I’ve hardly told you anything that happens in the novel – but it was really secondary to the feeling of being in it. As Jane noted in her card, I will race towards any novel with a theatrical setting. I’ve never come across one as deeply immersed in theatre as this one, or as successfully. Perhaps it isn’t an authentically 1880s novel, and certainly the dialogue never feels 1880s – nor does it feel 1950s – but that doesn’t matter. Like all the most enjoyable novels, it invites you into a fully realised world, confident in the significance of its characters to keep you entertained and engaged for all of its 476 pages. I’m so glad I accepted the invitation.

The Unspeakable Skipton by Pamela Hansford Johnson (25 Books in 25 Days: #6)

I think I bought Pamela Hansford Johnson’s The Unspeakable Skipton (1959) partly because of the similarity of the title to Saki’s The Unbearable Bassington – but I had also read a couple of PHJ’s other novels. I thought one was great (The Honours Board) and didn’t like another (An Error of Judgement), so where would Skipton sit on the spectrum?

She is certainly a varied author – this one isn’t like either of those, but it is very good. It’s principally a character piece. Daniel Skipton is a writer living hand-to-mouth in Belgium – he has had a critically successful novel followed by a critically unsuccessful one, and neither have made him much money. What he certainly doesn’t lack is self-confidence, as we see in the opening pages as he writes a bragging and insulting letter to his publisher, Utterson. While not writing, he endeavours to make money by convincing tourists to spend too much money on fake art, prostitutes, and a nude version of Leda (which the tourists who take up much of the book find hilarious).

Having had his lunch and rinsed out a pair of socks (he had only two pairs and kept one always in the wash), he took his manuscript from the table drawer, ranged before him his three pens, one with black ink, one with green, and one with red, and sat down to the hypnotic delight of polishing. The first draft of this book had been completed a year ago. Since then he had worked upon it every day, using the black pen for the correction of simple verbal or grammatical slips, the green pen for the burnishing of style, the red for marginal comment and suggestions for additional matter. He knew well enough that the cur Utterson would like to get his hands on it. It was not only a great book, it was the greatest novel in the English language, it would make his reputation all over the world and keep him in comfort, more than comfort, for the rest of his life.

Skipton reminded me quite a lot of Ignatius J Reilly, though The Unspeakable Skipton is nothing like A Confederacy of Dunces. It’s as though a character with Reilly’s monstrous nature was transposed to a much less heightened novel – and we see glimpses of Skipton’s genuine loneliness and desperation amongst the comedy of the situations Johnson creates.

Skipton is a wonderful creation, but I also enjoyed the band whom he encounters – from light-hearted Duncan to innocent Matthew to the intellectual snob Dorothy and her passive husband Cosmo. Dorothy apparently appears in another couple of novels in this sort-of series, and I would happily read more about her. She doesn’t have Skipton’s ruthless selfishness, but her sense of self-importance is not far behind – there is a wonderful scene where she gives a literary talk to an assembly of uninterested people.

So, The Unspeakable Skipton wasn’t really what I expected – but it is a character piece done with brio, and an unusual and confident novel.

Authors on Authors (Part 2)

A series of pamphlets called Writers and Their Work was issued by British Book News in the early 1950s, and I happen to have got my hands on two of them.  In fact, they were amongst the books I bought during Project 24.  As you’ll be gathering from this week (as if you didn’t already know) I love authors writing about authors – especially when both sides of the equation are authors whom I love.  I. Compton Burnett by Pamela Hansford Johnson was a no-brainer for me – I love ICB, and I like PHJ, so I had to get hold of this.  Plus it ticks off 1951 on A Century of Books in under fifty pages.  I’ll try to make my post appropriately brief.

I bang on about Dame Ivy quite a bit here – basically, I want everyone to try her, and I’ve resigned myself to the fact that at least four-fifths of those who give Ivy a whirl will be unimpressed.  But the final fifth… oh, boy, we love her!  As Hansford Johnson writes, ‘She is not to be mildly liked or disliked.  She is a writer to be left alone, or else to be made into an addiction.’  Reading this pamphlet has made this addict desperate to read another ICB novel, and I imagine it won’t be long before I’m writing about one.  I love reading another author’s enthusiasm for ICB, especially when she describes so perfectly what it is that I love about the Ivester.  (Sorry.  That won’t happen again.)

The peculiar charm of Miss Compton-Burnett’s novels, the charm that has won her not merely admirers but addicts, lies in her speaking of home-truths.  She achieves this by a certain fixed method.  One character propounds some ordinary, homely hypocrisy, the kind of phrase from which mankind for centuries has had his comfort and his peace of mind.  Immediately another character shows it up for the fraud it is, and does it in so plain and so frightful a fashion that one feels the sky is far more likely to fall upon the truth-teller than the hypocrite.  In these books there is always someone to lie and someone to tell the truth; the power of light and the power of darkness speaking antiphonally, with a dispassionate mutual understanding.
I can’t add much to that, except ‘agreed!’  A perceptive reader is always such a joy to read – that’s why we love blogs, isn’t it? – and Hansford Johnson writes as a reader, rather than a critic.  She shares the joy of the ICB addict; she recommends which novel to start with, and which to save for later; she even writes what amount to mini blog reviews of each novel – and, be warned, she gives away most of the plot, although plot is easily the least essential ingredient of a Compton-Burnett novel.  Drastic and shocking events occur, but only incidental to a lengthy discussion about grammar or, as PHJ points out above, the hypocrisy of a common phrase.  There is the occasional sense that PHJ wrote this quickly and could have done with editing a bit – one particular sentiment about service being unpleasant is repeated three times in 43 pages – but we can forgive her that.

What makes this pamphlet even more intriguing is that it was written in the middle of Ivy Compton-Burnett’s career.  In 1951 she still had seven novels yet to write, including my introduction to her, Mother and Son.  So this is not the place to go for the final say on Dame Ivy’s work, but it is fascinating to read a response in media res, as it were.

There is one description in this pamphlet which I will cherish – which so perfectly sums up ICB’s peculiar genius, and which I will finish on.  (Come back tomorrow for the final in this mini-series of Authors on Authors – and one which is rather less niche.)

This is why Miss Compton-Burnett’s writing appears so strange to the reader who comes upon it without warning, a gentle tea-cosy madness, a coil of vipers in a sewing-basket.

A Couple of Capuchins


Well, hasn’t it heated up? Anything above polar leaves me manically fanning myself and drinking gallons of water, so I welcome the cool evenings. My computer is also heating me up, in as much as it is slower than me in a marathon at the moment… if you’re reading this post, then the unlikely has occurred, and I have battled my way to posting it….!

I’ve had a little pile of Capuchin Classics to review for a while (click here for an interview that Emma, who runs Capuchin, did for Stuck-in-a-Book). First two out of the starting blocks are The Green Hat by Michael Arlen, and An Error of Judgement by Pamela Hansford Johnson…

The Green Hat first. I hadn’t heard of 1920s vogue novelist Michael Arlen (real name Dikran Konyoumdjian) but was swept in by the opening sentence: “What kind of hat was it?” And, more importantly, whom the wearer. In this Green Hat, Iris Storm makes her entrance – watched by the novel’s narrator – as she visits the recalcitrant Gerald March. What a simple way this novel begins, and yet what a whirl it takes one through – from simple domestic beginnings, we are whisked off over the country, through Europe, through philosophy about marriage; pondering on purity; the drama of near-death illness and the wit of the self-reflective. It’s impossible to describe succinctly the plot of The Green Hat, so I shall instead try to tempt you with its style. It’s the sort of novel we are assured that the 1920s are full of, and yet which I have never before read. It is the sort of novel which demonstrates how wrong those ‘writing experts’ are when they say never to use a metaphor where the truth will suffice; never to use five words where three will do, and preferably cut the whole chapter. Arlen luxuriates in his loquacity, and would not be ashamed to say so in words of comparable length.

There are sparks of humour, hyperbolic quips, which make you think he is of the Wodehouse school – then, twisted with a sardonic aftertaste, which brings Wilde instead to mind – and finally he will take the line into an entirely unexpected emotion or thought, which leaves you certain that this could only be described as ‘Arlen’. It is brilliant, and only occasionally wearying – like reading witty treacle.

Of course, all that warrants an example, and I can find nothing to fit – but I noted down this:

‘I said to the taxi-driver: “Hell can know no torment like the agony of an innocent in a cage,” and when he had carefully examined his tip he agreed with me.’

The characters are studies in fashionable absurdity; sincere caricatures. Arlen introduces these figures in a dramatic and unique manner – for example:

Hilary was a man who had convinced himself and everyone else that he had neither use nor time for the flibberty-gibberties of life. He collected postage-stamps and had sat as Liberal Member for an Essex constituency for fifteen years. To be a Liberal was against every one of his prejudices, but to be a Conservative was against all his convictions. He thought of democracy as a drain-pipe through which the world must crawl for its health. He did not think the health of the world would ever be good. When travelling he looked porters sternly in the face and over-tipped them. His eyes were grey and gentle, and they were suspicious of being amused. I think that Hilary treasured a belief that his eyes were cold and ironic, as also that his face was of a stern cast. His face was long, and the features somehow muddled. It was a kind face.

Some will say this is all show, and it probably is. People say true art conceals art, but the 1920s disagree – for a lavish, luxurious, and often hilarious read, but one which holds the emotional and painful experience of Iris, a character with depth behind the decadence – you can do little better than The Green Hat.

Onto An Error of Judgement. Pamela Hansford Johnson is one of those names which has been skirting around my consciousness forever, though never enough to actively seek out one of her novels. Written in 1962, An Error of Judgement is an odd mixture – on one hand it is a slanted comedy of manners, a depiction of an ailing marriage – but at the centre of the novel is a gruesome and senseless murder (described, thankfully, in a brief manner). The narrator, Victor, has a fairly average marriage to Jenny – as the novel opens, he has been to see a Harley Street doctor, Setter, and discovered that nothing is wrong with him: he imagines returning with this news – ‘I saw Jenny running toward me, her face alight with hope and fear. I saw her transformed into Maenad joy when she heard my good news, clutching at me, clawing at me, in the force of her delight nealy spilling us on the linoleum.’ In actuality:…

I put my key in the lock. Jenny came walking towards me.
“Darling,” I cried, “I’m all right! I’m all right!”
“I never thought you were anything else,” she said, replacing my constant image of her by the equally constant reality, “And what did all that cost us?”

Alongside the dynamics of this middle-class relationship, Setter is quite a grotesque character. He confesses to becoming a doctor because of his love of pain – both preventing and inflicting it. The latter temptation he scrupulously avoids, but thinks he might have found justification when a macabre murder takes place, and he believes he knows who did it.

These two strands work alongside each other, in a portrait of moral decisions and human foibles. Varying in scale, they are nonetheless compatible storylines – though perhaps neither are dealt with quite satisfactorily. I finished the novel uncertain what Pamela Hansford Johnson had been trying to achieve, or whether or not it had been achieved. Certainly a thinker, as they say.

Well, this post has taken longer than I’d have thought humanly possible, and my laptop has made every effort to prevent it… so I shall take myself to bed.