Vita Sackville-West
by William Strang.
|
So I bought it (despite promising the family that as they bought me a Kindle there would be no more books brought into the house) and very good I found it. Published in 1931, the novel centres on Lady Slane, whose husband, a former Prime Minister and foreign diplomat, has just died. Now aged 88, she moves into a small house in Hampstead, accompanied only by elderly maid Genoux, and thinks about the girl she once was – the girl who sublimated her own hopes and needs to become the perfect wife and mother, doing exactly what was expected of her.
She refuses to see her children, grandchildren or great-grandchildren, but enjoys the company of house owner Mr Bucktrout, handyman Mr Gosheron and eccentric millionaire Mr FitzGeorge, who met her many years before in India. Like her, they enjoy beauty, but they make no demands on her: they just let her be what she is.
We learn that although she lived in luxury, with furs and jewels, possessions mean little to her, and she once wanted to become an artist, but got married and became a passive ‘appendage’ while her husband led an active life, but her life was shaped and controlled by the conventions of society. She has not been unhappy, for she loved her husband, but the things she wanted were not part of his world and were never considered. Here, at the end of her life she is finally able to take control, and when Mr FitzGeorge leaves her his money and art collection she is able to recapture the girl she once was and remain true to herself – by giving the legacy away. And her action gives her great-granddaughter Deborah the courage to break her engagement and pursue a musical career, so she will find the fulfilment that Lady Slane never did.
It would be easy to view this as a feminist book, but I think Vita Sackville-West is pleading for everyone’s right to individual freedom. I like the cover of my Virago edition, which shows A Portrait of Mrs George Henry Boughton, attributed to R Caldecott, who is better known for his humorous work and his illustrations for children's books. The painting, of a woman whose own name is not important enough to be recorded, captures the way women were treated as possessions.
Edited, July 10, 2013: As you can see from Avril Silk's comment below, the portrait is by Kate Carr, and was formerly attributed to Caldecott. And the lady's name is Catherine.
Edited, July 10, 2013: As you can see from Avril Silk's comment below, the portrait is by Kate Carr, and was formerly attributed to Caldecott. And the lady's name is Catherine.
Lovely review. This is a beautiful book & I have the same edition as you. Did you ever see the TV movie with Wendy Hiller? Very good & faithful to the story.
ReplyDeleteThat's kind of you. Thank you. I've never seen the movie but I will ty and see if I can find a copy.
ReplyDeleteThis is one of those books that I love and listen to on a regular basis. If anyone knows of a Kindle version I would be interested in acquiring a copy as I need the large fonts that my Kindles offer to be able to read these days and I still prefer to read rather than listen. Ian
ReplyDeleteCatherine Boughton was the wife of the artist George Henry Boughton. He was born in England, worked a lot in America, then on his return he married Catherine. They lived in Campden, held fabulous parties and he had a passionate admirer in the shape of Violet Hunt (subject of 'A Most Immodest Violet'.)Lots about him and his work on the Net.
ReplyDeleteI have seen this portrait credited to Lucy Carr - possibly Lucy Comyns Carr.
I am a guide at Cothay Manor in Somerset, and the current owner is related to Catherine.
Avril, thank you so much for the information - I am glad I can now put a name to the lady in the photo. Just looked the Boughtons up - they sound quite a couple!
DeleteSorry - Kate Carr, not Lucy!
ReplyDeletehttp://jewelhistory.com/2009/03/20/mrs-george-henry-boughton-by-kate-carr/
Just got my book out, and looked at it again, and it does say the portrait is now attributed to Kate Carr, formerly attributed to Caldecott, so I obviously didn't read it properly. Sorry about that, I don't how I missed it. Thanks again for the information.
Delete