Analysis: "The Golden Bowl" and "Night and Day"

Two books that greatly demonstrated the social norms of London in the early twentieth century were “The Golden Bowl” and “Night and Day”. Both of these books looked at the woman’s role in society, what the common marriage looked like and societies opinion of being single after a “certain age”.

In “The Golden Bowl”, the average marriage at the time was portrayed. The husband and wife were married due to money and social standing, not love. The husband was cheating on the wife, and rather than divorcing him, the wife tried to secretly have his mistress move away. Considering the time era and place, relationships like this were not uncommon at all.

A big part of the reason why so many people got married either through pre-decided arrangements or because of money/social standing rather than love had a lot to do with the Victorian Period, (which ended in 1901). One article I read stated that:

‘The term Victorian, which literally describes things and events (roughly) in the reign of Queen Victoria, conveyed connotations of "prudish," "repressed," and "old fashioned."’

Because of this and the large Catholic community in London at the time made it so that sex, sexuality and public displays of affection were all highly frowned upon. Because of this, it would naturally be very difficult for people to fall in love. This also explains why Maggie Verver, (main character in “The Golden Bowl”) did not try to divorce her husband after she discovered that he was having an affair. Although it was not explicitly stated, considering the time and place, Maggie was probably Catholic, and getting a divorce is typically not allowed within the Catholic religion, (as a note, I have nothing against Catholicism).

What is really interesting is that in the next book I want to discuss, “Night and Day” several of these norms started to change. In “Night and Day” one of the main female characters, Mary Datchet, actually remains single throughout the entire book, despite her being at an “advanced age” which is almost anytime after about the age of twenty-five. She was also was an advocate for women that wanted the right to vote, which was not only a revolutionary idea, but one that was not widely accepted at the time.

The reason why I think “Night and Day” had such a different look at social norms, (and the breaking of them) is because of the end of the Victorian period. “Night and Day” took place a bit after the true end of the Victorian era, when people started changing their views on what marriage, love, and women’s rights. So because of that, “Night and Day” was a truly revolutionary book.

Both of these books showed a solid interpretation of a very prim and proper England at the turn of the century. One showed what London looked like at the very beginning of the twentieth century, and the other showed what just a few short years could change. It would be very interesting to see what the next decade in London looked like.

London: 1900-1910 Images

Public Locations

Transportation

Fashion

Technology

Book Three: Night and Day

"Night and Day" was interesting because it showed a very different world than the one shown in "The Golden Bowl". In "The Golden Bowl", a very traditional idea of marriage and equality was portrayed, (the women were very submissive to their husbands and marriage was for money and a title, not love). Instead, "Night and Day" showed a very different approach, not only on romantic relationships, but on the females' role in society.

In "Night and Day" there are four main characters: Katharine Hilbery, Ralph Denham, Mary Datchet and William Rodney. Katharine is an upper class woman who is initially engaged to William, but calls off her engagement because he seems more interested in her cousin than her. At the time, for someone, especially a woman, to call off their engagement because of love. While there were definitely people who married for love, most marriages revolved around money or "gaining" something, so this was a refreshing change of pace.

Mary Datchet is a truly interesting character because of her rather unsuccessful love life and colorful personal life. It was typically believed at the time, (not to generalize) that an unmarried woman was a little... off, for lack of better words. What makes her even more interesting is the fact that worked for an organization for the enactment of women's suffrage, (giving women the right to vote etc). Mary was a very strong, out-spoken female, a rarity at the time.

"Night and Day" was a true story about the advancement in women's rights, something that was so frowned upon at the time. It demonstrated the changing of social norms and that love and marriage can, (and should) go together. I found it to be a pleasant change of pace from "The Golden Bowl" which showed what really was "normal" back in early 20th century London. I think that this book proves that with a combined effort, social norms can be changed for the better, and that all it takes is a joint effort.

Maps of London: 1900-1910

Famous British authors:

• Virginia Woolf

1. Passionate Apprentice: The Early Journals, 1897–1909

• T. S. Eliot (American-born)

1. Inventions of the March Hare: Poems 1909-1917

• Joseph Conrad (Polish-born)

1. Lord Jim (1900)
2. The Inheritors (1901)
3. Typhoon (1902, begun 1899)
4. Heart of Darkness (1902)
5. Romance (1903)
6. Nostromo (1904)
7. The Secret Agent (1907)

• Bernard Shaw (Irish-born)

1. The Admirable Bashville (1901)
2. Man and Superman (1902–03)
3. John Bull's Other Island (1904)
4. How He Lied to Her Husband (1904)
5. Major Barbara (1905)
6. The Doctor's Dilemma (1906)
7. Getting Married (1908)
8. The Glimpse of Reality (1909)
9. The Fascinating Foundling (1909)
10. Press Cuttings (1909)
11. Misalliance (1910)

London 1900-1910:

• Starting point of WWI
• Englad had the largest empire in history
• Industrial Revolution
• First ever motor bus system was introduced to London in the early 1900s
• London started to get completely wired for advanced electricity

Book Two: The Golden Bowl

This book really studied the social norms of early 20th century London. It followed the lives of Maggie Verver, her father Adam Verver, her husband Prince Amerigo and his mistress, (her father's wife) Charlotte Stant.

This book really demonstrates the difference in norms from the 1900's to today. When Maggie discovered that Amerigo was having an affair with her father's new wife, rather than divorcing him and telling her father that his wife was being unfaithful to him, she felt that she had to save her marriage or else fear being publicly ridiculed for being divorced. Also, instead of just confronting her husband, which granted would be hard to do even now, she had to resort to quite and secretive meddling, (resulting in her father and Charlotte moving to America whilst the Prince and she stayed in England).

Beyond that, this book also demonstrated the true lack of respect for women that many men, (not to be stereotypical) had at the time. Amerigo, who did seem to care about Maggie a bit, mainly married her for her money, at least this was my impression. Maggie came from a very wealthy family, (her father, Adam, was a successful art collector and financier) whereas Amerigo, despite being a prince, was completely impoverished. He [Amerigo] fell into an adulterous relationship easily, (he and Charlotte had been together before he even met Maggie) despite being married and well knowing that his mistress was married.

Amerigo felt that he was fully entitled in having an affair because his wife enjoyed spending time with her father, which would leave him feeling moderately lonely and more than anything, bored. With these few excuses and his overall feeling of superiority, he successfully entered into an affair.

Overall, I think that this book was a very clear view of the modern English relationship. It showed the lack of care for marriage that many men seemed to have at the time, (those that carried on with mistresses that is) as well as the free-wheeling of the "upper class". What I mean by this is that since the families in question were of a higher income, it gave them the ability to not really care about consequences the way that someone without a financial backing would. In closing, this book gave me a thorough look at the social norms of early 20th century London, something my last book, The Hounds of Baskervilles, didn't quite cover for me.

Timeline

Famous British authors:

• Virginia Woolf

1. Passionate Apprentice: The Early Journals, 1897–1909

• T. S. Eliot (American-born)

1. Inventions of the March Hare: Poems 1909-1917

• Joseph Conrad (Polish-born)

1. Lord Jim (1900)
2. The Inheritors (1901)
3. Typhoon (1902, begun 1899)
4. Heart of Darkness (1902)
5. Romance (1903)
6. Nostromo (1904)
7. The Secret Agent (1907)

• Bernard Shaw (Irish-born)

1. The Admirable Bashville (1901)
2. Man and Superman (1902–03)
3. John Bull's Other Island (1904)
4. How He Lied to Her Husband (1904)
5. Major Barbara (1905)
6. The Doctor's Dilemma (1906)
7. Getting Married (1908)
8. The Glimpse of Reality (1909)
9. The Fascinating Foundling (1909)
10. Press Cuttings (1909)
11. Misalliance (1910)

London 1900-1910:

• Starting point of WWI
• Englad had the largest empire in history
• Industrial Revolution
• First ever motor bus system was introduced to London in the early 1900s
• London started to get completely wired for advanced electricity

Book One: The Hound of Baskervilles

When I chose to read "The Hound of Baskervilles" I was hoping that the story would give me a bit more information about London the city, rather than just telling me about the people. While this book did have wonderful descriptions of the scenery, most of the descriptions were of places that either aren't real or only directly related to the places that Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson were visiting in order to find clues.

Despite this slight fallback, I did get a sense for what the people in London at the time might have really spoken and acted like. Considering that the author, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, wrote this story in the early 20th century, the language used felt very appropriate for lack of better words. The speech was somewhat formal compared to what I am used to, not Shakespearean by any means, but a little bit more "educated" sounding, (something I am not against seeing more of in the slightest). For example:

"Really, Watson, you excel yourself," said Holmes...

People today don't often use phrases such as, "You excel yourself". It's a relatively simple phrase, but it is one that isn't used much anymore. All of the writing in this book is this way, from Holmes's witty and somewhat egotistical banter, to Watson's, still highly educated, but more identifiable speech. What I mean by identifiable is that he seems a bit more like the average person. Homes often comes off almost like a super-human with his deductive and observational abilities. Watson is very clever in his own right and he tries very hard to solve the case before Holmes does, which is something that the reader attempts to do as well, (at least that was the case for me).

In conclusion, I feel that more than anything, I have a better understanding of the people from London in the early 20th century. There is a certain level of class that was upheld by almost all citizens, (at least that seemed the case in this story) and several of the people in the city appeared to have at least some type of education. I would like to now do some research about London in real life and see if there are any statistics about education at the time. Even literacy rates would be helpful, but I think I would like to find some articles and graphs about this.