<<

. 39
( 47 .)



>>

± Ford Madox Ford records James™s poke at Marlow in Joseph Conrad: A
Personal Remembrance (London: Duckworth, ±), pp. ±°“±.
° Henry James, ˜˜The New Novel™™ in Literary Criticism: Essays on Literature,
American Writers, and English Writers (New York: Library of America, ±),
p. ±. Further quotations from this edition will be cited in the body of the
chapter with the abbreviation ˜˜LC±.™™
± For an account of the e¬ects of the Great War on James™s writing, see
Roslyn Jolly, Henry James: History, Narrative, Fiction (Oxford: Clarendon Press,
±), pp. °“.
 In the same year that James criticized Conrad™s use of ¬rst-person narration
as risque modernism, the Vorticist Wyndham Lewis blasted it as passe
´ ´
realism. Ford Madox Ford records a ±± conversation in which Lewis
explosively condemned Ford™s and Conrad™s Impressionist principles and
techniques, particularly their use of ¬rst-person narrators:
˜˜You try to make people believe that they are passing through an experience when
they read you. You write these immense long stories, recounted by a doctor at table
or a ship-captain in an inn. You take ages to get these fellows in. In order to make
your stu¬ seem convincing. Who wants to be convinced? Get a move on. Get out or
get under. This is the day of Cubism, Futurism, Vorticism. What people want is me,
not you. They want to see me. A Vortex. To liven them up. You and Conrad had
the idea of concealing yourself when you wrote. I display myself all over the page.™™
Your Mirror to My Times: The Selected Autobiographies and Impressions of Ford Madox
Ford, ed. Michael Killigrew (New York: Holt, Rineheart, and Winston,
±·±), pp. ±“.
Whereas James uncomfortably perceives the author brazenly exposing
himself in the ˜˜autobiographic form™™ of ¬rst-person narration, Lewis impa-
tiently beholds a narrator-dummy who calls attention away from the
moving lips of a bad author-ventriloquist.
 Henry James, ˜˜The Lesson of the Master™™ (±), The Complete Tales of Henry
James, ed. Leon Edel, ± vols. (Philadelphia: Lippincott, ±), VII, pp. µ“
. Further citations from this edition will be cited in the body of the text with
the abbreviation ˜˜CT™™ and the relevant volume number.
 Notes to pages ±±“±µ
 My thinking about masculinity, artistry, and discipline is indebted to Ada-
ms™s Dandies and Desert Saints and Sussman™s Victorian Masculinities. My read-
ing of discipleship in ˜˜The Lesson of the Master™™ is also in¬‚uenced by
Michael A. Cooper, ˜˜Discipl(in)ing the Master, Mastering the Discipl(in)e:
Erotonomies of Discipleship in James™s Tales of Literary Life,™™ Engendering
Men: The Question of Male Feminist Criticism, ed. Joseph A. Boone and Michael
Cadden (New York: Routledge, ±°).
µ Henry James: Letters, ed. Leon Edel,  vols. (Cambridge, MA: Belknap-
Harvard University Press, ±), IV, p. µ.
 Philip Horne, Henry James and Revision: The New York Edition (Oxford: Claren-
don Press, ±°), p. . Horne notes that the allusion to a ˜˜free, unhoused
condition™™ reverses Othello™s justi¬cation for marrying Desdemona to
provide a rationale for James™s own decision not to marry.
· Like self-display, masochism can be understood as a disavowed component
of normative Victorian bourgeois masculinity; see Adams, Dandies and Desert
Saints, pp. ±“·. In Male Masochism: Modern Revisions of the Story of Love
(Bloomington: Indiana University Press, ±µ), Carol Siegel considers mod-
ernist and postmodernist literary representations of male masochism in
order to elucidate how erotic submission has come to be seen as unnatural
for heterosexual men. For a discussion of masochism as at the heart of all
subjectivity, albeit disavowed at the site of masculinity, see Silverman, Male
Subjectivity at the Margins, pp. ±µ“±; for an alternative perspective, which
di¬erentiates between masochistic submission and non-masochistic ˜˜sur-
render,™™ see Emmanuel Ghent, ˜˜Masochism, Submission, Surrender:
Masochism as a Perversion of Surrender,™™ Contemporary Psychoanalysis , no.
± (±°).
 Leon Edel notes that James attributes this motto, the germ of The Ambassa-
dors, to W. D. Howells in a notebook entry of October ±, ±µ; see Henry
James: A Life (New York: Harper and Row, ±µ), p. ·.
 In an ± Century Magazine essay, James returns to the absence of women
and marriage from Stevenson™s ¬ction. Here, however, James associates
adventure with bachelorhood: ˜˜Why should a person marry when he might
be swinging a cutlass or looking for a buried treasure?™™ (LC±, p. ±).
Although James is somewhat condescending here about the address of
Stevenson™s ˜˜boy books™™ to ˜˜immature minds,™™ he generally sees Steven-
son™s use of male characters and appeal to a male readership as sources of
his literary strength.
° Brodhead, The School of Hawthorne, p. ±±.
± William Dean Howells was more comfortable than James with the notion
that an author could be both ˜˜entrepreneur™™ and ˜˜working-man™™; see
Howells, ˜˜The Man of Letters as a Man of Business,™™ Literature and Life (New
York: Harper and Bros., ±°).
 As noted in chapter , Ralph Touchett compares himself to Caliban when
describing his in¬‚uence over Isabel (I, p. ±). When Ralph says that he is
not Prospero, Ralph implies that he is a mere functionary, not an initiator of
Notes to pages ±“± 
action or a creator of plots.
 It is signi¬cant that this story opens with an act of proxying: one man
standing in for another in relation to yet a third man. This con¬guration
indicates a triangulation of desire within homosexual relations as well as
within homosocial relations where the woman provides the point of trans-
mission between men. It also highlights the importance of the proxy as an
embodiment of representation, linking representation to sexual desire as
well as to male-male relations more generally.
 William Cohen also considers the triangulated desires at issue in these two
stories in Sex Scandal: The Private Parts of Victorian Fiction (Durham, NC: Duke
University Press, ±), pp. “. Whereas Cohen argues that the nar-
rators™ appetite for information about their literary heroes eclipses their
capacity for sexual desire, I maintain that the narrators™ epistemological,
literary, and erotic desires are all mutually constitutive.
µ This is rather di¬erent from saying that the bachelor narrator should have
desired Miss Tina. Such a reading would fall into the heteronormative trap
that Sedgwick elucidates in her in¬‚uential reading of James™s ˜˜The Beast in
the Jungle™™; see Epistemology, pp. °±“.
 Holland, The Expense of Vision, pp. ± and ±.
· Arguably, the violent passion of the Maenads is hysteria and thus a sign of
uncontrollable female passion, but I would emphasize here the control that
they exert over Orpheus™s fate rather than their own lack of self-control. On
the multiple and changing meanings of Maenads, see Linda M. Shires, ˜˜Of
Maenads, Mothers, and Feminized Males: Victorian Readings of the
French Revolution,™™ in Rewriting the Victorians: Theory, History, and the Politics of
Gender, ed. Linda M. Shires (New York: Routledge, ±).
 James, Notebooks, p. .
 Adeline R. Tintner surveys the appearance of Byronic material in three
phases of James™s writing in ˜˜Henry James and Byron: A Victorian Roman-
tic Relationship,™™ The Byron Journal  (±±).
° James may have become aware of the controversy when W. D. Howells
printed Stowe™s article, ˜˜The True Story of Lady Byron™s Life,™™ in The
Atlantic Monthly , no. ± (February ±). It also seems likely that the
scandal provoked by Stowe™s book may have become associated in James™s
mind with the ±· scandal occasioned by the allegations of adultery
between Mrs. Isabella Tilton and the Reverend Henry Ward Beecher
(Stowe™s brother), whom Henry James, Sr., defended in print. The sensa-
tional public debate in which Henry Sr. participated deeply embarrassed
the James family and, as Alfred Habegger has discovered, many family
letters from the period were destroyed, setting a prototype for the problem-
atic letters and their destruction in ˜˜Aspern.™™ For details on the Beecher“
Tilton scandal as it pertains to the James family, see Alfred Habegger, Henry
James and the Woman Business (Cambridge University Press, ±), pp. ·“.
In ˜˜Henry James and Byron,™™ p. µ, Tintner notes that in ±µ James
visited the Lovelaces to look at some Byron papers that turned out to
 Notes to pages ±µ“±±
contain proof of Byron™s incest with his half-sister, but James™s notebook
record of this visit indicates that he already knew of the incest even though
he did not know that he would see evidence of it in the letters.
± I am indebted here to Peter Brooks™s readings of Great Expectations and Heart
of Darkness with respect to detective ¬ction in his Reading for the Plot; see
especially pp. ±µ“· and pp. “µ.
 The detective is both the disciple of the criminal and also the criminal™s
would-be master, one who represents the authority of the Law. The am-
bivalence of the relations between these male ¬gures is sometimes re¬gured
as an internal con¬‚ict within the detective, and vice versa. This divided/
doubled articulation of masculine subjectivity is evident, for example, in
Arthur Conan Doyle™s Sherlock Holmes stories, which couple the master
detective with his male disciple and sidekick, Dr. Watson, and with the
criminal mastermind, Professor Moriarity.
 Some of the most in¬‚uential commentaries on the radical ambiguity or
unreadability of ˜˜Figure™™ include Shlomith Rimmon, The Concept of Ambi-
guity “ The Example of James (University of Chicago Press, ±··), pp. µ“±±µ; J.
Hillis Miller, ˜˜The Figure in the Carpet,™™ Poetics Today ±, no.  (Spring
±°); and Shoshana Felman, ˜˜Turning the Screw of Interpretation,™™
Literature and Psychoanalysis: The Question of Reading Otherwise, ed. Shoshana
Felman (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, ±). Gerard M.
Sweeney emphasizes the deadliness of identifying the ¬gure in ˜˜The Deadly
Figure in James™s Carpet,™™ Modern Language Studies ±, no.  (Fall ±).
 The narrator™s representation of Gwendolen Erme as a female decadent
suggests the comparably gendered and sexual threats posed by the ¬n-de-
siecle ¬gures of the New Woman and the aesthete. Linda Dowling connects
`
these two ¬gures in ˜˜The Decadent and the New Woman in the ±°s,™™
Nineteenth-Century Fiction  (±·).
µ See Lawrence Levine, Highbrow/Lowbrow: The Emergence of Cultural Hierarchy
in America (Cambridge, MA: harvard University Press, ±), pp. ±“°°.
 James, Notebooks, p. ±.
· Edel describes this moment of reckoning as the natural outcome of the
trauma of being booed o¬ stage in ±±, a public humiliation James su¬ered
on the opening night of his play, Guy Domville; see Henry James, pp. ±“. For
sustained reconsiderations of James™s engagement with his multiple audien-
ces, see Michael Anesko, Friction With the Market: Henry James and the Profession of
Authorship (Oxford University Press, ±); Freedman, Professions of Taste; and
Strychacz, Modernism, Mass Culture, and Professionalism, pp. µ“.
 James, Notebooks, p. ±°.

  ·   ¦ ¬ « ©® § ®
± Zdzislaw Najder™s biography Joseph Conrad: A Chronicle (New Brunswick, NJ:
Rutgers University Press, ±), p. µ, dates the title change sometime
during January ±±°, the month in which Conrad completed the novel.
However, the shift of narrative focus to the narrator™s point of view prob-
Notes to pages ±±“± µ
ably occurred during the preceding two years of the novel™s composition.
On the composition of the novel, see Keith Carabine, ˜˜The Figure Behind
the Veil: Conrad and Razumov in Under Western Eyes,™™ and David R. Smith,
˜˜The Hidden Narrative: The K in Conrad,™™ both in Joseph Conrad™s Under
Western Eyes: Beginnings, Revisions, Final Forms: Five Essays, ed. David R.
Smith (Hamden, CT: Archon Books, ±±).
 The ˜˜decline theory™™ of Conrad™s later work “ initiated by Virginia Woolf
in ˜˜Joseph Conrad,™™ The Common Reader (±; London: Hogarth Press,
±µ), and reinforced by Thomas Moser in Joseph Conrad: Achievement and
Decline (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, ±µ·) “ links the sup-
posed lesser quality of his later work to his treatment of the apparently
uncongenial subjects of women and heterosexual love. Najder, Joseph Con-
rad, only slightly modi¬es this theory by arguing that Conrad™s later writings
on these subjects ˜˜may be taken rather as a symptom of his weariness than as
the cause of his decline™™ (p. ). Recently, critics have begun to reassess the
importance of issues of gender and sexual relations to Conrad™s writing over
the course of his career; see, for example, the recent collection, Conrad and
Gender, ed. Andrew Michael Roberts (Amsterdam: Rodolpi, ±).
 Their almost exclusively male casts of characters, in combination with their
episodic form and their exotic settings, marked Youth (±), Heart of Darkness
(±), and Lord Jim (±°°) as novels of incident rather than as novels of
character. For an account of the contemporary reception of Conrad™s early
writing as adventure ¬ction manque, see Andrea White, Joseph Conrad and the
´
Adventure Tradition: Constructing and Deconstructing the Imperial Subject (Cam-
bridge University Press, ±)
 December µ, ±°, The Collected Letters of Joseph Conrad, ed. Frederick Karl
and Laurence Davies, µ vols. (Cambridge University Press, ±), III, p. .
µ Joseph Conrad, Under Western Eyes (±±±; Harmondsworth: Penguin, ±·),
p. ±µ·. Further page references will be included in the body of the chapter.
 Peter Ivanovitch is described as an ˜˜inspired man™™ (p. ) in the ¬nal line
of Under Western Eyes, but the language of inspiration appears throughout
the novel.
· On the targeting of women readers in the publicity campaign waged in The
New York Herald, where Chance was serialized in the United States, see Cedric
Watts, ˜˜Marketing Modernism: How Conrad Prospered,™™ Modernist Writers
and the Marketplace, ed. Ian Willison, Warwick Gould, and Warren Chernaik
(London: Macmillan, ±). See also Laurence Davies, ˜˜Conrad, Chance,
and Women Readers,™™ Conrad and Gender, ed. Roberts.
 Cited in Frederick R. Karl, Joseph Conrad: The Three Lives (New York: Farrar,
Straus and Giroux, ±·), p. .
 Karl, Joseph Conrad, p. ·.
±° Joseph Conrad, Author™s Note to Youth, The Norton Edition of Heart of Darkness,
ed. Robert Kimbrough (±±; New York: Norton, ±), pp. “.
±± On Conrad™s and Ford Madox Ford™s collaboration, see Wayne Koesten-
baum, Double Talk: The Erotics of Male Literary Collaboration (New York:
 Notes to pages ±“±
Routledge, ±), pp. ±“·, and Raymond Brebach, Joseph Conrad, Ford
Madox Ford, and the Making of Romance (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan
Research Press, ±µ). For ¬rst-hand accounts of their collaboration, see
Joseph Conrad and Ford Madox Ford, Prefaces and Appendix to The Nature
of a Crime (London: Duckworth, ±), and Ford™s Joseph Conrad.
± The very expression (i.e., his refusal to ˜˜justify his existence™™) that Conrad
uses in his ±° Author™s Note with respect to the narrator of Under Western
Eyes, he also uses in his ±± A Personal Record to express his distaste for
Rousseau and particularly for the mode that his Confessions represented to
him.
± Conrad™s emphasis on his impartial and fair treatment of Russia in the
Author™s Note resembles his stance in Autocracy and War (±°µ), his political
piece on Russia written several years earlier. Najder, Joseph Conrad, notes
that ˜˜when ¬rst printed in the Fortnightly Review the article carried the motto
sine ira et studio [without anger and ardor]. The passage about the partition of
Poland was even accompanied by the reservation ˜without indulging in
excessive feelings of indignation at that country™s partition™™™ (p. °).
± In his introduction to Under Western Eyes (Harmondsworth: Penguin, ±µ),
p. °, Boris Ford treats Conrad™s intensi¬ed feelings of Polish patriotism
during these years; see also Jocelyn Baines, Joseph Conrad: A Critical Biography
(Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, ±·), pp. ·“.
±µ Much of my evidence for this reading of the con¬‚ict between, and within,
Conrad™s national and authorial identities comes from Karl™s biography. In
the same letter to John Galsworthy in which he describes being ˜˜caught
between one™s impulse, one™s art and that question [of saleability],™™ Conrad
attributes the failure of The Secret Agent to ˜˜Foreignness I suppose,™™ thus
indicating the tension between artistic success and national identity; cited in
Karl, Joseph Conrad, pp. “. He then goes on to outline his early plan for
˜˜Razumov,™™ the manuscript title for Under Western Eyes. Najder, Joseph
Conrad, discusses the conception of Under Western Eyes in the context of
Conrad™s ¬nancial problems and hopes for popular success, pp. “°; see
also Cedric Watts, Joseph Conrad: A Literary Life (London: Macmillan, ±),
pp. ±°“±.
± In his analysis of ˜˜authorial double talk,™™ Penn R. Szittya observes that the
narrator profoundly distrusts the imagination and ¬ction despite his osten-
sible praise of art, using this observation to support his suggestion that
˜˜Razumov may be an oblique ¬gure of the novelist™™; see ˜˜Meta¬ction: The
Double Narration in Under Western Eyes,™™ English Literary History , no. 
(Winter ±±), “. I emphasize, by contrast, the tension between the
narrator™s encomium to the realism of great art and the use of allusions in
this novel to actual, historical ¬gures, such as ˜˜de P-™™ who is the historical
Viacheslav Konstantinovitch Plehve, assassinated by a thrown bomb in July
±°, and of ¬ctional ¬gures conspicuously modelled on historical ¬gures,
such as ˜˜Madame de S-™™ who is explicitly, though unfavorably, compared
to ˜˜that other dangerous and exiled woman, Madame de Stael (p. ±). ¨
Notes to pages ±·“±µµ ·
Morton Dauwen Zabel gives a helpful account of the historical sources
relevant to this period of Conrad™s writing career in his Introduction and
supplementary notes to Under Western Eyes (Garden City, NY: Anchor-
Doubleday, ±).

<<

. 39
( 47 .)



>>